Berghof Glossary on Conflict Transformation

The Berghof Glossary on Conflict Transformation presents 20 of the main principles and approaches used by the Berghof Foundation in its work. It is a concise and accessible exploration of what it takes to create “space for conflict transformation”. 2019 edition.

The Berghof Glossary on Conflict Transformation presents 20 of the main principles and approaches used by the Berghof Foundation in its work. It is a concise and accessible exploration of what it takes to create “space for conflict transformation”. 2019 edition.


Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Glossary</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Transformati<strong>on</strong> and Peacebuilding<br />

20 essays <strong>on</strong> theory and practice

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Glossary</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

<strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

and Peacebuilding<br />

20 essays <strong>on</strong> theory and practice<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> (ed.)


© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> Operati<strong>on</strong>s GmbH<br />

Lindenstrasse 34<br />

10969 Berlin<br />

Germany<br />

Ph<strong>on</strong>e +49 (0)30 844154-0<br />

Fax +49 (0)30 844154-99<br />

www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org<br />

Twitter @<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g>Fnd<br />

Facebook /<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g>Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

ISBN 978-3-941514-36-2<br />

2019 <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> Operati<strong>on</strong>s GmbH<br />

Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0 DE.<br />

Quotati<strong>on</strong> permitted and welcome. Please address derivatives requests to <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong> Operati<strong>on</strong>s GmbH: info@berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org<br />

Acknowledgements<br />

Editorial team: Beatrix Austin, with Hans J. Giessmann, Andreas<br />

Schädel and Ali Annan<br />

Layout: Edenspiekermann, Christoph Lang<br />

Language Editing and Proofreading: Hillary Crowe, Beatrix Austin<br />

Photo selecti<strong>on</strong>: Astrid Fischer

C<strong>on</strong>tents<br />

Abbreviati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

Introducti<strong>on</strong><br />

1. Addressing Social Grievances<br />

2. Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>: Dignity, Justice, Trust<br />

3. Breaking Deadlocks: Peace Process Support<br />

4. Building and Sustaining Peace<br />

5. Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice<br />

6. Educating for Peace<br />

7. Empowerment and Ownership<br />

8. Engaging D<strong>on</strong>ors<br />

9. Establishing Infrastructures for Peace<br />

10. Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong> and Dialogue<br />

11. Fostering Human Security<br />

12. Gender and Youth: Changing Perspective<br />

13. Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>: Working Together<br />

14. Learning Together: M<strong>on</strong>itoring, Evaluating, Reflecting<br />

15. Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support<br />

16. Preventing Violence<br />

17. Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance<br />

18. Researching C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

19. Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

20. Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong><br />

and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

Annex<br />

About <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

11 Milest<strong>on</strong>es<br />

Photo Credits<br />


Abbreviati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

ANC African Nati<strong>on</strong>al C<strong>on</strong>gress, South Africa<br />

CPN-M Communist Party of Nepal – Maoist<br />

ETA<br />

Basque separatist group Euskadi Ta Askatasuna<br />

EU<br />

European Uni<strong>on</strong><br />

GRIT Graduated Reciprocal Reducti<strong>on</strong>s in Tensi<strong>on</strong><br />

ECOWAS Ec<strong>on</strong>omic Community of West African States<br />

i4p<br />

Infrastructure(s) for Peace<br />

IGAD Intergovernmental Authority <strong>on</strong> Development<br />

KLA<br />

Kosovo Liberati<strong>on</strong> Army<br />

M-19 Movimiento 19 de Abril, Colombia<br />

M & E M<strong>on</strong>itoring and evaluati<strong>on</strong><br />

NGO N<strong>on</strong>-governmental organisati<strong>on</strong><br />

OECD Organisati<strong>on</strong> for Ec<strong>on</strong>omic Co-operati<strong>on</strong><br />

and Development<br />

OECD-DAC Development Assistance Committee of the<br />

Organisati<strong>on</strong> for Ec<strong>on</strong>omic Co-operati<strong>on</strong><br />

and Development<br />

OSCE Organizati<strong>on</strong> for Security and Co-operati<strong>on</strong><br />

in Europe<br />

SIPRI Stockholm Internati<strong>on</strong>al Peace Research Institute<br />

UGTT Tunisian General Labour Uni<strong>on</strong> (Uni<strong>on</strong> Générale<br />

Tunisienne du Travail)<br />

UN<br />

United Nati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

UNESCO United Nati<strong>on</strong>s Educati<strong>on</strong>al, Scientific<br />

and Cultural Organizati<strong>on</strong><br />

US(A) United States (of America)<br />

USD US Dollar

Introducti<strong>on</strong><br />

Introducti<strong>on</strong><br />

“People need hope and inspirati<strong>on</strong> desperately. But hope and<br />

inspirati<strong>on</strong> are <strong>on</strong>ly sustained by work.”<br />

Tarana Burke<br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Glossary</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong> presents the<br />

main principles and approaches that we use in our work, which<br />

supports people and c<strong>on</strong>flict parties around the world in creating<br />

a more peaceful future.<br />

For a sec<strong>on</strong>d time, the team at the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> has embarked<br />

<strong>on</strong> a joint explorati<strong>on</strong> in order to chart a shared understanding<br />

of what it takes to create “space for c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>”.<br />

It has been seven years since we first published this small<br />

and compact booklet as a guide to our interpretati<strong>on</strong> of the cornerst<strong>on</strong>es<br />

of peacebuilding and c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> (<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong> 2012). The organisati<strong>on</strong>, and the world around us,<br />

has changed c<strong>on</strong>siderably in these seven years since 2012 (illustrated,<br />

for example, by the Annual Reports for 2013 and 2017, and<br />

Sheriff et al. 2018).<br />

Nati<strong>on</strong>ally and internati<strong>on</strong>ally, the space for inclusive and c<strong>on</strong>structive<br />

peacebuilding has begun to shrink measurably. The use<br />

of force, polarisati<strong>on</strong> and oppressi<strong>on</strong> are gaining ground again,<br />

despite having proven to be less effective and more costly, as<br />

is argued, for example, by Lisa Schirch. The prop<strong>on</strong>ents of the<br />

inclusive and c<strong>on</strong>structive approach must therefore get their<br />

“ducks in a row” and their message clear. (A need underlined by<br />

a 2018 report <strong>on</strong> the topic of supporting peacebuilding in times<br />

of change). We can take courage and strength from a number of<br />

countervailing trends, such as the opening of new spaces and<br />

partnerships, and the willingness of internati<strong>on</strong>al bodies and<br />

nati<strong>on</strong>al governments to endorse, sometimes <strong>on</strong> paper first, a<br />

str<strong>on</strong>g peacebuilding rhetoric and agenda.<br />


Introducti<strong>on</strong><br />

At the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, we remain c<strong>on</strong>vinced that c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> can succeed. It will not do so, however, without<br />

the dedicati<strong>on</strong> and hard work of actors across all levels and<br />

sectors. Importantly, c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> and peacebuilding<br />

must be led (and wanted) by the actors involved in violent<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict and escalati<strong>on</strong>, who c<strong>on</strong>trol the drivers and durati<strong>on</strong> of<br />

the c<strong>on</strong>flicts. Both the involved parties and their transformati<strong>on</strong>orientated<br />

supporters must also take seriously the emerging uncertainties<br />

and challenges, which require new approaches and<br />

realistic risk assessment.<br />

For peacebuilding prop<strong>on</strong>ents, there are numerous worrying<br />

trends which, at the time of writing, have started to point towards<br />

an emerging crisis of the entire internati<strong>on</strong>al order. One<br />

visible expressi<strong>on</strong> of this crisis is the weakening of existing multilateral<br />

regimes governing areas such as arms c<strong>on</strong>trol, internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

trade and regi<strong>on</strong>al cooperati<strong>on</strong>. Some nati<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>flicts<br />

have become proxy wars – as in Yemen, Syria or Eastern Ukraine,<br />

to menti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong>ly a few – primarily at the expense of a suffering local<br />

populati<strong>on</strong>. Other c<strong>on</strong>flicts have increasingly spilled violence<br />

over nati<strong>on</strong>al boundaries, thereby creating z<strong>on</strong>es of regi<strong>on</strong>al instability,<br />

particularly in parts of the Middle East and Africa.<br />

Another worrying development, related to manifold social grievances,<br />

is the sharpening political polarisati<strong>on</strong> in a number of<br />

democratic states, which – in domestic and in internati<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>texts<br />

– appears to make strategies based <strong>on</strong> political paternalism<br />

and exclusi<strong>on</strong> more attractive to many people than cooperative<br />

approaches. Many countries in the Global South rely <strong>on</strong> the support<br />

provided by democratic d<strong>on</strong>or countries. If this support is<br />

vanishing, milli<strong>on</strong>s of people in these countries may lose hope<br />

that building peace will benefit them at all.<br />

However, if there is <strong>on</strong>e tangible less<strong>on</strong> to be learned from the<br />

past, it is that neither power politics nor exclusi<strong>on</strong> will ever<br />

lead to sustainable peace. Rather than being discouraged by<br />

the uncertainties and fricti<strong>on</strong>s in the internati<strong>on</strong>al political en-<br />


Introducti<strong>on</strong><br />

vir<strong>on</strong>ment, we take them as a call for analysis and acti<strong>on</strong>. We<br />

are c<strong>on</strong>vinced that inclusive and participatory spaces for c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> have become even more important in preventing<br />

fragile peace processes from losing momentum or breaking<br />

down.<br />

Credibly holding <strong>on</strong> to our values is of utmost importance in this<br />

c<strong>on</strong>text. We must undertake more efforts to anticipate the implicati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

of these changes for our work, to adapt to new challenges<br />

and/or to seize new opportunities in a timely and c<strong>on</strong>vincing<br />

manner. New political c<strong>on</strong>stellati<strong>on</strong>s – nati<strong>on</strong>ally and internati<strong>on</strong>ally<br />

– may create risks but also new opportunities for communicati<strong>on</strong><br />

and exchange.<br />

In light of this, some of the 20 noti<strong>on</strong>s in the previous editi<strong>on</strong> of<br />

this booklet remain cornerst<strong>on</strong>es of our understanding and practice:<br />

we understand c<strong>on</strong>flict to be a necessary and useful force for<br />

change, rather than a danger to be suppressed or managed. We<br />

str<strong>on</strong>gly believe that principles of (local) ownership and resp<strong>on</strong>sibility,<br />

empowerment, n<strong>on</strong>-violence, participati<strong>on</strong> and inclusivity<br />

must guide our work. We take guidance from those in c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

and are multipartial towards those experiencing sometimes violent<br />

strife. We shape dialogue and facilitate negotiati<strong>on</strong> processes<br />

in the role of a supporting actor. We know that the legacies of<br />

a violent past must be addressed in c<strong>on</strong>temporary peacebuilding<br />

processes. And we believe that human security, dignity and trust<br />

are important values to uphold. While these approaches remain<br />

central to our work, with this editi<strong>on</strong> of the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Glossary</str<strong>on</strong>g> we are also<br />

reviewing the ways in which they needed to adjust given the new<br />

trends in our peacebuilding envir<strong>on</strong>ment.<br />

Some noti<strong>on</strong>s have already gained new prominence in our understanding<br />

and practice in resp<strong>on</strong>se to these trends: the creati<strong>on</strong> of<br />

innovative and locally designed infrastructures for peace, or the<br />

re-focusing of attenti<strong>on</strong> also <strong>on</strong> our home country of Germany,<br />

where our peace educati<strong>on</strong> team has adopted c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive<br />

approaches to the integrati<strong>on</strong> of refugees. These areas highlight<br />


Introducti<strong>on</strong><br />

needs and new spaces of engagement to which we enthusiastically<br />

bring our curiosity and experience.<br />

From in between these noti<strong>on</strong>s, “the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> approach” or the<br />

“<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> spirit” emerges. Like the best aspirati<strong>on</strong>s in life, it<br />

sometimes remains elusive, but c<strong>on</strong>tinues to be the organisati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

method we are aspiring to and working towards. First and<br />

foremost, the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> approach emphasises the importance of<br />

Relati<strong>on</strong>ships and l<strong>on</strong>g-term relati<strong>on</strong>ship-building<br />

Working with local partners and c<strong>on</strong>flict parties<br />

Multi-faceted designs and peer learning, also and<br />

importantly from “south to south”<br />

Weaving together research and practice<br />

Allowing for the transformative power of c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Our approach builds <strong>on</strong> the principles of multipartiality, by which<br />

we take the legitimate c<strong>on</strong>cerns and interests of all parties involved<br />

in – or affected by – a (violent) c<strong>on</strong>flict into account (for<br />

more informati<strong>on</strong>, see our Annual Report 2017). In the following,<br />

we reflect <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> and peacebuilding in theory<br />

and practice in more detail, by adding examples as well as challenges<br />

arising in our daily work. We hope you will discover and be<br />

enticed by these definiti<strong>on</strong>s and nuances in equal measure.<br />

This collecti<strong>on</strong> of essays would not have been possible without<br />

the engagement of our colleagues in Germany and bey<strong>on</strong>d. They<br />

have made time, bey<strong>on</strong>d their demanding work in peace educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

peace process support and c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> research,<br />

to sit together in novel c<strong>on</strong>stellati<strong>on</strong>s across the entire organisati<strong>on</strong><br />

to debate and work out what it means, for example, to<br />

facilitate dialogue between c<strong>on</strong>flict parties. Or to meaningfully<br />

integrate youth. Or to deal with the past.<br />

Our thanks go to all of these colleagues, and the <strong>on</strong>es who have<br />

before them showed the same dedicati<strong>on</strong> to the first editi<strong>on</strong> of<br />

the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Glossary</str<strong>on</strong>g>. Our essays stand, sometimes quite “literally”, <strong>on</strong><br />

the shoulders of those c<strong>on</strong>tributing to the first editi<strong>on</strong> of this<br />


Introducti<strong>on</strong><br />

booklet: namely Beatrix Austin, Anna Bernhard, Vér<strong>on</strong>ique Dudouet,<br />

Martina Fischer, Hans J. Giessmann, Günther Gugel, Javaid<br />

Hayat, Amy Hunter, Uli Jäger, Daniela Körppen, Ljubinka<br />

Petrovic-Ziemer, Katrin Planta, Nadine Ritzi, Anne Romund,<br />

Norbert Ropers, Barbara Unger, Luxshi Vimalarajah, Oliver Wils,<br />

Oliver Wolleh and Johannes Zundel. Some of these colleagues<br />

have since left to go <strong>on</strong> to work with other organisati<strong>on</strong>s that<br />

foster peace and c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>. We hope they will read<br />

this new editi<strong>on</strong> with interest and inspirati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

We c<strong>on</strong>tinue to be grateful for the support of the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s<br />

shareholders and management who have seen the usefulness<br />

of such a broad-based process of developing a shared understanding<br />

of the noti<strong>on</strong>s we operate with in the c<strong>on</strong>flict world.<br />

Thanks go, last but by no means least, to the local teams and<br />

partners with whom we work in many demanding settings and<br />

who are the judges of our engagement, by our deeds as much as<br />

our words.<br />

Berlin, December 2018<br />

References<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> (2018). Annual Report 2017. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/<br />

Annual_Report/BF_Annual_Report_2017.pdf<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> (2014). Annual Report 2013. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/<br />

Annual_Report/<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g>_Foundati<strong>on</strong>_Annual_Report_2013_Web_150113.pdf)<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> (ed.) (2012). <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Glossary</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>. 20<br />

noti<strong>on</strong>s for theory and practice. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>. Also available<br />

in German, Thai and Turkish. https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/en/<br />

publicati<strong>on</strong>s/glossary/<br />

Lisa Schirch (2018). The State of Peacebuilding 2018. Twelve Observati<strong>on</strong>s. Blog.<br />

26 November 2018. https://lisaschirch.wordpress.com/2018/11/26/thestate-of-peacebuilding-2018-twelve-observati<strong>on</strong>s/<br />

Andrew Sherriff et al. (2018). Supporting Peacebuilding in Times of Change.<br />

Brussels: ECDPM http://ecdpm.org/wp-c<strong>on</strong>tent/uploads/ECDPM-2018-<br />

Supporting-Peacebuilding-Times-Change-Synthesis-Report.pdf<br />


Addressing Social Grievances<br />

1 Addressing<br />

Social Grievances<br />

Sara Abbas, Matteo Dressler and Nicole Rieber<br />

“N<strong>on</strong>violence does not always work – but violence never does.”<br />

Madge Micheels-Cyrus<br />

Many current violent c<strong>on</strong>flicts are rooted in group-based<br />

grievances arising from inequality, exclusi<strong>on</strong>, lack of opportunities<br />

to satisfy basic needs (food, healthcare, educati<strong>on</strong>),<br />

poor governance or feelings of injustice. When an aggrieved<br />

group is mobilised and assigns blame to others (to an ethnic<br />

or religious group or to an authority or state) for its perceived<br />

political, ec<strong>on</strong>omic or social problems, those grievances can<br />

cross the tipping point into social upheaval and violence.<br />

However, there are numerous n<strong>on</strong>-violent ways for those in-<br />


Addressing Social Grievances<br />

SOCIAL GRIEVANCE | the percepti<strong>on</strong> of a socially defined group<br />

that it suffers from systematic inequality, exclusi<strong>on</strong>, lack of opportunity<br />

to satisfy basic needs, and other disadvantage. Social<br />

grievance is often at the root of c<strong>on</strong>flict. When groups mobilise,<br />

they may take violent or n<strong>on</strong>-violent acti<strong>on</strong> to address social<br />

grievance. C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> and peacebuilding support<br />

groups and mobilisers in choosing n<strong>on</strong>-violent means while taking<br />

grievances seriously.<br />

NON-VIOLENCE | a philosophy and practice that holds the use<br />

of force to be morally and politically illegitimate or counterproductive<br />

and strives to find n<strong>on</strong>-violent expressi<strong>on</strong>s of resistance<br />

to oppressi<strong>on</strong>.<br />

VIOLENCE | harmful and damaging behaviour of a physical,<br />

structural or cultural nature, which prevents human beings from<br />

reaching their full potential.<br />

volved of addressing social grievance and c<strong>on</strong>flicts over (in)<br />

equality.<br />

Drivers of social grievances<br />

To turn into social grievances, latent inequalities have to be politicised.<br />

Three factors stand out in this process. First, there needs<br />

to be a percepti<strong>on</strong> of clearly distinguishable “groups” in society.<br />

Sec<strong>on</strong>d, groups must be able to compare each other’s objective<br />

or perceived characteristics. Third, inequality or exclusi<strong>on</strong> must<br />

be seen as unjust and another group must be blamed for this<br />

unfairness (as argued by Lars-Erik Cederman and his colleagues<br />

in 2013). These “groups” are not fixed in time; rather, identities<br />

are fluid and c<strong>on</strong>stantly being shaped and reshaped.<br />

Many social grievances are rooted in exclusi<strong>on</strong> and oppressi<strong>on</strong>,<br />

which can serve as a basis for collective mobilisati<strong>on</strong> and therefore<br />

become drivers of c<strong>on</strong>flict. Percepti<strong>on</strong>s of exclusi<strong>on</strong> can also<br />


Addressing Social Grievances<br />

For example …<br />

Nigeria’s oil-rich Niger Delta provides an example of how inequalities<br />

and social grievances can drive people to support violence<br />

against the state. Past decades in the Delta have seen an<br />

increase in violence and insecurity, fuelled by income inequality,<br />

poverty and frustrated expectati<strong>on</strong>s. A lack of political rights,<br />

the socio-ec<strong>on</strong>omic discriminati<strong>on</strong> based <strong>on</strong> religi<strong>on</strong> or ethnicity,<br />

and the experience of injustice are examples of vertical and<br />

horiz<strong>on</strong>tal inequalities (United Nati<strong>on</strong>s and World Bank 2018). In<br />

the Niger Delta, unfair distributi<strong>on</strong> of oil revenue and destroyed<br />

livelihood opportunities have resulted in social grievances.<br />

play an important role in turning grievances into violence. As<br />

noted by the United Nati<strong>on</strong>s and World Bank (2018, 122, with reference<br />

to research by Ted Gurr), “percepti<strong>on</strong>s of exclusi<strong>on</strong> and<br />

inequality” appear to be central for building up grievances, even<br />

when these percepti<strong>on</strong>s do not align with objective inequalities.<br />

Before exclusi<strong>on</strong> patterns and grievances turn into outright<br />

violence, they often foment over a l<strong>on</strong>g period. In Leban<strong>on</strong>, for<br />

instance, Lebanese young people and the Syrian and Palestinian<br />

refugee communities feel particularly marginalised and<br />

deprived due to their political, social and ec<strong>on</strong>omic exclusi<strong>on</strong>.<br />

The resulting disenfranchisement may be the same; the drivers,<br />

however, are different. In the case of the Lebanese youth, who<br />

face high levels of unemployment, the issue is primarily about<br />

state-society cleavages. In the case of the refugee communities,<br />

it is mainly about the lack of legal and political recogniti<strong>on</strong>:<br />

for example, Palestinian refugees are legally excluded from the<br />

job market. This combinati<strong>on</strong> of factors has led to a wave of<br />

radicalisati<strong>on</strong>. In the 2010s, this resulted in an increase in local<br />

clashes between supporters of extremist groups and the security<br />

forces.<br />


Addressing Social Grievances<br />

In situati<strong>on</strong>s of protracted c<strong>on</strong>flict, there is also a high risk of violence<br />

becoming a vicious cycle, for those exposed to violence, especially<br />

at a young age, are more likely to turn to violence themselves.<br />

(An example is the recruitment and abuse of minors by<br />

adults who were child soldiers themselves, aided by a degree of<br />

habituati<strong>on</strong> to violence as normality). This is particularly true if<br />

groups or whole communities are exposed to violence over time,<br />

a c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong> underlined by a 2016 <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook Dialogue<br />

<strong>on</strong> post-war healing and dealing with the past.<br />

Addressing social grievances through violence: social upheaval<br />

Addressing horiz<strong>on</strong>tal and vertical inequalities and social grievances<br />

is key to preventing c<strong>on</strong>flicts from turning violent (→ Preventing<br />

Violence). Yet in societies where the root causes of social<br />

grievances remain unaddressed, or where avenues for n<strong>on</strong>-violent<br />

collective mobilisati<strong>on</strong> are few, groups that are excluded socially,<br />

politically or ec<strong>on</strong>omically may begin to view violence as<br />

the <strong>on</strong>ly viable opti<strong>on</strong> for redress. One factor that heavily influences<br />

this dynamic is the use of repressi<strong>on</strong>, for example by state<br />

security agencies against aggrieved groups’ n<strong>on</strong>-violent dissent,<br />

since repressi<strong>on</strong> tends to create a cycle of violence.<br />

Peace and c<strong>on</strong>flict research has tried to elucidate the origins of<br />

violence, especially the phenomen<strong>on</strong> of escalati<strong>on</strong> from latent to<br />

violent c<strong>on</strong>flict through ethnopolitical mobilisati<strong>on</strong> of aggrieved<br />

groups (→ Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics). As Johan Galtung argued<br />

back in 1969, systematic inequality, generated by allowing<br />

some groups access to resources while denying it to others, is a<br />

pervasive, normalised and largely invisible form of violence. Cultural<br />

violence, driven by differences over religi<strong>on</strong>, ideology, language,<br />

art or science, generates abuse against “others”. Taking<br />

these prevalent but n<strong>on</strong>-physical forms of violence in c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

Sim<strong>on</strong> Fisher and his colleagues (2000) offered a definiti<strong>on</strong> of<br />

violence as “acti<strong>on</strong>s, words, attitudes, structures or systems that<br />

cause physical, psychological, social or envir<strong>on</strong>mental damage<br />

and/or prevent people from reaching their full human potential”.<br />


Addressing Social Grievances<br />

Strategies to deal with such multifaceted violence need to focus<br />

<strong>on</strong> individual factors, structural factors and the enabling envir<strong>on</strong>ment<br />

– often simultaneously (→ Preventing Violence).<br />

Since 2006, through its work <strong>on</strong> resistance and liberati<strong>on</strong> movements,<br />

the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> has striven to understand why<br />

these groups, which draw <strong>on</strong> the social grievances of parts of<br />

the populati<strong>on</strong>, shift from n<strong>on</strong>-violent to violent c<strong>on</strong>flict strategies<br />

and vice versa. Participatory studies <strong>on</strong> the African Nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

C<strong>on</strong>gress (ANC) in South Africa, Movimiento 19 de Abril (M-19)<br />

in Colombia, the Communist Party of Nepal – Maoist (CPN-M)<br />

and the Kosovo Liberati<strong>on</strong> Army (KLA), am<strong>on</strong>g others, show that<br />

these groups viewed armed acti<strong>on</strong> as a last resort in the face of<br />

state repressi<strong>on</strong> of n<strong>on</strong>-violent protest. These resistance and liberati<strong>on</strong><br />

movements c<strong>on</strong>sidered violence (e. g. through guerrilla<br />

warfare) as a legitimate form of political acti<strong>on</strong> and as <strong>on</strong>e means<br />

of self-defence and struggle (am<strong>on</strong>g others) in the face of human<br />

rights violati<strong>on</strong>s. These means, violent and n<strong>on</strong>-violent, were<br />

employed, sometimes simultaneously, by the groups in resp<strong>on</strong>se<br />

to a changing political envir<strong>on</strong>ment. Our approach aims at enabling<br />

such groups to overcome grievances through means of<br />

n<strong>on</strong>-violent c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> rather than the use of force.<br />

Addressing social grievances through n<strong>on</strong>-violence<br />

N<strong>on</strong>-violence can provide an alternative strategy for aggrieved<br />

social groups to seek redress against inequality or oppressi<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Rooted in the c<strong>on</strong>victi<strong>on</strong> that use of force is morally illegitimate<br />

and/or strategically counterproductive, n<strong>on</strong>-violent resistance<br />

aims to achieve social change and to resist oppressi<strong>on</strong> and violence<br />

in all its forms.<br />

Historically, n<strong>on</strong>-violence has included various methods of direct<br />

acti<strong>on</strong>. Gene Sharp detailed acti<strong>on</strong>s ranging from symbolic<br />

protest and persuasi<strong>on</strong> to social, political and ec<strong>on</strong>omic n<strong>on</strong>cooperati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

civil disobedience, c<strong>on</strong>fr<strong>on</strong>tati<strong>on</strong> without violence,<br />

and the building of alternative instituti<strong>on</strong>s. N<strong>on</strong>-violent methods<br />


Addressing Social Grievances<br />

have achieved change through the productive dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong> of<br />

“people power” against autocratic or repressive regimes and human<br />

rights abuses in many places across the globe, for example<br />

Tunisia in 2011 and Armenia in 2018.<br />

Although n<strong>on</strong>-violent resistance magnifies existing social and<br />

political tensi<strong>on</strong>s by imposing greater costs <strong>on</strong> those who want<br />

to maintain their advantages under an existing system, it can be<br />

described as a precursor to c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>. N<strong>on</strong>-violent<br />

techniques can enable minorities or dominated groups (“the underdogs”)<br />

to address their grievances and to mobilise and take<br />

acti<strong>on</strong> towards empowerment and a restructuring of relati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

with their powerful opp<strong>on</strong>ents (power-holders or pro-status quo<br />

forces, “the elites” or “top dogs”). The aim is both dialogue and<br />

resistance: dialogue with the people <strong>on</strong> the other side to persuade<br />

them, and resistance to oppressive structures to compel<br />

change (→ Empowerment and Ownership).<br />

Building <strong>on</strong> its track record of investigating n<strong>on</strong>-violence, the<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s current research aims to paint a more comprehensive<br />

picture of the social and political processes which<br />

c<strong>on</strong>nect n<strong>on</strong>-violent methods to democratic c<strong>on</strong>solidati<strong>on</strong>, in<br />

order to foster c<strong>on</strong>structive social change.<br />

Challenges and ways forward<br />

The success of n<strong>on</strong>-violent approaches can <strong>on</strong>ly be judged by<br />

carefully assessing their outcomes and effects over the l<strong>on</strong>g term.<br />

A new area of critical inquiry in this c<strong>on</strong>text is social media.<br />

Social media have proven to be a double-edged sword: <strong>on</strong> the<br />

<strong>on</strong>e hand, they offer new avenues for expressing grievances and<br />

engaging in c<strong>on</strong>structive dialogue. On the other hand, they can<br />

become a platform where grievances are actually channelled<br />

toward violence, for example by extremist organisati<strong>on</strong>s intent<br />

<strong>on</strong> fomenting hate, fear and mistrust and exploiting local grievances<br />

to recruit globally.<br />


Addressing Social Grievances<br />

Moreover, n<strong>on</strong>-violence may not always work to overcome social<br />

grievances, for example in highly polarised c<strong>on</strong>flicts involving<br />

seemingly n<strong>on</strong>-negotiable issues. If power structures and practices<br />

do not allow for n<strong>on</strong>-violent transformati<strong>on</strong>, parties to a<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict may stick to violent opti<strong>on</strong>s, out of despair or because<br />

of a lack of other opportunities. In some of these cases, dialogue<br />

and c<strong>on</strong>flict mitigati<strong>on</strong> methods may successfully complement<br />

n<strong>on</strong>-violent tactics, emphasising the preventi<strong>on</strong> of violence<br />

while striving to redress the structural inequalities which led<br />

aggrieved groups to resist in the first place. Moreover, c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

resoluti<strong>on</strong> methods can help turn achievements of civil resistance<br />

into comm<strong>on</strong>ly accepted, negotiated agreements, mending<br />

polarised relati<strong>on</strong>ships through n<strong>on</strong>-violent c<strong>on</strong>flict (Dudouet<br />

2017). All methods need to be applied within c<strong>on</strong>flict parties and<br />

violent groupings as well as across divides. Third parties, such<br />

as the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, can be helpful in creating spaces for<br />

dialogue, negotiati<strong>on</strong> and mediati<strong>on</strong> for n<strong>on</strong>-violent interacti<strong>on</strong><br />

am<strong>on</strong>g the c<strong>on</strong>flict parties.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Lars-Erik Cederman, Kristian S. Gleditsch and Halvard Buhaug (2013). Inequality,<br />

Grievances, and Civil War. Cambridge University Press.<br />

Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan (2011). Why Civil Resistance Works: The<br />

Strategic Logic of N<strong>on</strong>violent C<strong>on</strong>flict. New York: Columbia University Press.<br />

Sim<strong>on</strong> Fisher, Dekha Ibrahim Abdi, Jawed Ludin, Richard Smith, Sue Williams<br />

and Steven Williams (2000). Working with C<strong>on</strong>flict: Skills and Strategies for<br />

Acti<strong>on</strong>. L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: Zed Books.<br />

Johan Galtung (1990). “Cultural Violence”, Journal of Peace Research, 27(3),<br />

291–305.<br />

Gene Sharp (1973). The Politics of N<strong>on</strong>-Violent Acti<strong>on</strong>. Bost<strong>on</strong>: Porter Sargent.<br />

United Nati<strong>on</strong>s and World Bank (2018). Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches<br />

to Preventing Violent C<strong>on</strong>flict. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: World Bank.<br />


Addressing Social Grievances<br />

Online Resources<br />

Beatrix Austin & Martina Fischer (eds.) (2016). Transforming War-Related<br />

Identities. Individual and Social Approaches to Healing and Dealing with the<br />

Past. <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook Dialogue Series No. 11. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/<br />

Handbook/Dialogues/201610dialogue11_transformingwarrelatedidentities_<br />

complete.pdf<br />

Markus Bayer, Felix S. Bethke and Matteo Dressler (2017). “How N<strong>on</strong>violent<br />

Resistance Helps to C<strong>on</strong>solidate Gains for Civil Society after Democratizati<strong>on</strong>.”<br />

Minds of the Movement Blog. Washingt<strong>on</strong>: Internati<strong>on</strong>al Center <strong>on</strong> N<strong>on</strong>violent<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict. https://www.n<strong>on</strong>violent-c<strong>on</strong>flict.org/blog_post/how-n<strong>on</strong>violentresistance-helps-c<strong>on</strong>solidate-gains-democratizati<strong>on</strong>/.<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> Project Website: “N<strong>on</strong>violent Resistance and Democratic<br />

C<strong>on</strong>solidati<strong>on</strong>”, https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/en/programmes/<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict-transformati<strong>on</strong>-research/n<strong>on</strong>violent-resistance-and-democraticc<strong>on</strong>solidati<strong>on</strong>/.<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Transiti<strong>on</strong>s Series (<strong>on</strong>going), https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/<br />

publicati<strong>on</strong>s/transiti<strong>on</strong>s-series/.<br />

Vér<strong>on</strong>ique Dudouet (2017). Powering to Peace: Integrated Civil Resistance<br />

and Peacebuilding Strategies. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: Internati<strong>on</strong>al Center <strong>on</strong><br />

N<strong>on</strong>violent C<strong>on</strong>flict. https://www.n<strong>on</strong>violent-c<strong>on</strong>flict.org/wp-c<strong>on</strong>tent/<br />

uloads/2017/05/Powering-to-Peace.pdf.<br />

Vér<strong>on</strong>ique Dudouet (2009). From War to Politics: Resistance/Liberati<strong>on</strong><br />

Movements in Transiti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Report No. 17. <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Research Center for<br />

C<strong>on</strong>structive C<strong>on</strong>flict Management. https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/<br />

fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Papers/Reports/br17e.pdf.<br />


Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>: Dignity, Justice, Trust<br />

2 Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>:<br />

Dignity, Justice, Trust<br />

Julian Demmer and Norbert Ropers<br />

“The road to peace is paved with dignity.”<br />

D<strong>on</strong>na Hicks<br />

Dignity, trust and justice – as well as their opposites, humiliati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

distrust and injustice – do not feature prominently in reflecti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

<strong>on</strong> peace projects. But they are very much present am<strong>on</strong>g<br />

and within the people involved in the c<strong>on</strong>flicts. It is therefore all<br />

the more important that all who wish to support those projects<br />

are sensitive to these dimensi<strong>on</strong>s and develop the respect and<br />

empathy that are essential for work in this field.<br />


Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>: Dignity, Justice, Trust<br />

DIGNITY | the state or quality of being worthy of h<strong>on</strong>our or respect.<br />

Peace rests, am<strong>on</strong>g other aspects, <strong>on</strong> upholding the value<br />

and principle of dignity for all regardless of their origin.<br />

HUMILIATION | the introducti<strong>on</strong> of a hierarchy between pers<strong>on</strong>s<br />

with superior and inferior status, by which some are “put down<br />

and held down”.<br />

Dignity, trust and justice<br />

Dignity is a term used to indicate that all human beings have an<br />

inalienable right to respectful and ethical treatment. Dignity became<br />

a key term in the Age of Enlightenment and in the human<br />

rights movement of the 20th century. It culminated in Article 1<br />

of the Universal Declarati<strong>on</strong> of Human Rights, adopted in 1948,<br />

which states:<br />

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and<br />

rights. They are endowed with reas<strong>on</strong> and c<strong>on</strong>science and<br />

should act towards <strong>on</strong>e another in a spirit of brotherhood.” 1<br />

Trust is a term that signifies that people have, in principle, positive<br />

expectati<strong>on</strong>s of the intenti<strong>on</strong>s and behaviour of other pers<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

These positive expectati<strong>on</strong>s can be based <strong>on</strong> close face-to<br />

face interacti<strong>on</strong>s and b<strong>on</strong>ding, for example in a family or am<strong>on</strong>g<br />

friends, or <strong>on</strong> joint membership in groups and communities with<br />

well-established social and cultural norms. The type and level<br />

of trust raise highly complex issues, but it is generally assumed<br />

that there is a significant difference in the trust that exists within<br />

identity groups and between them, be they ethno-nati<strong>on</strong>al, religious<br />

or other culturally defined groups.<br />

While there is no comm<strong>on</strong>ly agreed definiti<strong>on</strong> of justice, its principle<br />

suum cuique – every<strong>on</strong>e should have what he or she is en-<br />

1 More gender-sensitive wording has yet to be adopted<br />


Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>: Dignity, Justice, Trust<br />

titled to – appears to be universal in reach. Accordingly, justice<br />

is understood as “a state of affairs where actors obtain what they<br />

are entitled to” (Müller 2013, 45). Yet who is entitled to what is<br />

highly c<strong>on</strong>tested and depends <strong>on</strong> the actors’ perspective. Such<br />

perspectives are shaped by both cultural norms and pers<strong>on</strong>al<br />

experiences, and can thus be highly subjective. Justice is thus<br />

about the allocati<strong>on</strong> of goods or benefits, be they in the ec<strong>on</strong>omic<br />

realm of distributi<strong>on</strong>, the cultural realm of recogniti<strong>on</strong> or the<br />

political realm of representati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

The experience of being treated fairly and justly is important for<br />

a pers<strong>on</strong>’s sense of dignity as well as their ability to trust. This in<br />

turn plays a crucial role in the transformati<strong>on</strong> of inter-pers<strong>on</strong>al<br />

and collective c<strong>on</strong>flicts and enhances the prospects for → Building<br />

and Sustaining Peace.<br />

The high price of humiliati<strong>on</strong>, distrust and injustice<br />

The vital role of dignity, trust and justice can be vividly dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />

by c<strong>on</strong>trasting them with their absences: humiliati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

distrust and injustice, and their c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong>s to the escalati<strong>on</strong><br />

and protracted nature of violent c<strong>on</strong>flicts.<br />

Injustice is a state of affairs in which actors perceive a discrepancy<br />

between entitlements and benefits. ‘Striving for justice’ seeks<br />

to correct this perceived discrepancy and is a basic driver of (violent<br />

as well as n<strong>on</strong>violent) acti<strong>on</strong>. Transformati<strong>on</strong> places justice<br />

at the core, supposing a normative drive of c<strong>on</strong>structive social<br />

change towards a just peace. Justice, here, is both an end and<br />

a practical principle guiding the means by which social change<br />

is pursued. Examples of this can be found within the sub-field<br />

of peace mediati<strong>on</strong>, where empirical findings stress the importance<br />

of procedural and distributive justice for the sustainability<br />

of peace agreements, or the sub-field of rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> studies.<br />

David Bloomfield, based <strong>on</strong> his own experience in and bey<strong>on</strong>d<br />

Northern Ireland, has argued for the centrality of “a systematised<br />

definiti<strong>on</strong> of social right and wr<strong>on</strong>g, from which grows an<br />


Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>: Dignity, Justice, Trust<br />

underlying shared value: that the justice system applies to all of<br />

us, that it acts fairly, that we can trust it”.<br />

The term “humiliati<strong>on</strong>” indicates that instead of acknowledging<br />

the equal dignity of all human beings, a hierarchy is introduced<br />

between pers<strong>on</strong>s with superior and inferior status (the<br />

most extreme example being the German words “Übermensch”<br />

and “Untermensch” used by the Nazis). Accordingly, Evelin<br />

Lindner defines the essence of humiliati<strong>on</strong> as being “about putting<br />

down and holding down”. Looking at history from this angle,<br />

humiliati<strong>on</strong> was interpreted in most societies of the world<br />

as part of a “natural order” of superiors and inferiors, at least<br />

until the Enlightenment. Tragically, there are many countries<br />

in which this fundamentally unequal “natural order” is still in<br />

place today. There is also often a temptati<strong>on</strong> to impose “topdown<br />

soluti<strong>on</strong>s” as a simplifying method to deal with the complexity<br />

of c<strong>on</strong>flicts.<br />

In c<strong>on</strong>flicts, the close relati<strong>on</strong>ship between collective political<br />

violence and humiliati<strong>on</strong> is evident when fighting not <strong>on</strong>ly aims<br />

to achieve the physical destructi<strong>on</strong> or “neutralisati<strong>on</strong>” of the enemy,<br />

but also targets their symbols of identity, respect and dignity,<br />

and their h<strong>on</strong>our and collective achievements. Often, the<br />

first acts of violence are directed against these symbols, such<br />

as when the Nazis destroyed and burned down more than 1500<br />

synagogues during the Night of Broken Glass in November 1938,<br />

marking the start of the Holocaust. In many protracted c<strong>on</strong>flicts,<br />

the violence against the opposing side’s symbols, such as places<br />

of worship and cultural pride (libraries, museums), and violence<br />

against people are closely c<strong>on</strong>nected. This is dramatically expressed<br />

in collective sexual violence, which aims to degrade the<br />

physical and moral integrity of the enemy.<br />

Tragically, collective humiliati<strong>on</strong> in the c<strong>on</strong>text of war and violence<br />

has the systemic tendency to reproduce itself, particularly<br />

if the victorious side makes no efforts to acknowledge the painful<br />

narratives of the past, to address issues of transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice<br />


Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>: Dignity, Justice, Trust<br />

and to engage in some kind of genuine process of rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong><br />

(→ Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice). For effective<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, it is therefore crucial to overcome the<br />

cycle of humiliati<strong>on</strong> and counter-humiliati<strong>on</strong> and to work towards<br />

a comprehensive understanding of human dignity.<br />

The central role of building trust<br />

The main challenge in transforming c<strong>on</strong>flicts shaped and driven<br />

by humiliati<strong>on</strong> by <strong>on</strong>e side or by sequences of mutual humiliati<strong>on</strong><br />

is to find ways to overcome the deep distrust that this engenders.<br />

Particularly in the case of protracted c<strong>on</strong>flicts, the distrust is so<br />

deeply ingrained in the emoti<strong>on</strong>s and attitudes of the parties that<br />

even occasi<strong>on</strong>al gestures of c<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> are often perceived by<br />

the recipients as a ploy to undermine their positi<strong>on</strong>. To initiate<br />

genuine processes of c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, it is therefore crucial<br />

to develop strategies of trust and c<strong>on</strong>fidence-building, and<br />

ultimately to find ways of gradually building more just, dignified<br />

and trustworthy relati<strong>on</strong>ships. The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s work<br />

in Abkhazia, for example, is proving that this principle is highly<br />

relevant by slowly, relati<strong>on</strong>ship by relati<strong>on</strong>ship, enabling more<br />

and more public debate of highly c<strong>on</strong>tentious issues.<br />

During the East-West c<strong>on</strong>flict until 1989, investigating measures<br />

of c<strong>on</strong>fidence-building was <strong>on</strong>e of the key areas of peace<br />

research and practical peace initiatives. A remarkable c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong><br />

<strong>on</strong> trust building in this c<strong>on</strong>text was developed by the psychologist<br />

Charles Osgood in 1962 with his strategy for “graduated<br />

reciprocal reducti<strong>on</strong>s in tensi<strong>on</strong>” (GRIT). His argument was that<br />

single de-escalatory measures in protracted c<strong>on</strong>flicts will be of<br />

little value because they can easily be rejected as public relati<strong>on</strong><br />

stunts. Instead, <strong>on</strong>e side should take the initiative and generate<br />

a series of small c<strong>on</strong>ciliatory gestures, which are publicly announced<br />

and implemented step-by-step, independently of the<br />

resp<strong>on</strong>se of the other side. If the latter party reciprocates with<br />

similar measures, more significant steps should be taken. The<br />

core idea is to trigger a cycle of de-escalati<strong>on</strong> with a l<strong>on</strong>g-term<br />


Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>: Dignity, Justice, Trust<br />

perspective by means of unilateral initiatives and to accompany<br />

this process with some kind of dialogue to promote mutual understanding<br />

and foster joint analyses.<br />

Whether this approach can be applied to internal c<strong>on</strong>flicts involving<br />

internati<strong>on</strong>ally recognised states and n<strong>on</strong>-state armed<br />

groups (or liberati<strong>on</strong> and resistance movements) is an open<br />

questi<strong>on</strong>. The problem in these cases is that there is not <strong>on</strong>ly<br />

deep mistrust between the parties, but often fundamental disagreement<br />

<strong>on</strong> the legitimacy of the existing political order as<br />

well. The general understanding is that trust building is a multi-dimensi<strong>on</strong>al<br />

process in which elements of rati<strong>on</strong>ally defined<br />

comm<strong>on</strong> interests, transparency and predictability play an important<br />

role, as do emoti<strong>on</strong>al and relati<strong>on</strong>ship factors. Also, the<br />

percepti<strong>on</strong> that a more just and hence more legitimate political<br />

system is being built is of great importance here. Trust cannot be<br />

imposed <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flicting parties, nor can it grow without empathy<br />

and cooperati<strong>on</strong>, which is why procedural justice becomes<br />

imperative as it fosters positive attitudes, cooperative behaviour,<br />

participati<strong>on</strong> possibilities and ultimately c<strong>on</strong>flict reducti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

In cases of humiliati<strong>on</strong> and traumatic experiences of violence,<br />

trust building means addressing issues of transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice<br />

and rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>. At a minimum, it requires some kind of acknowledgement<br />

of the painful past. And even in the best cases,<br />

trust to engage in c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> needs opportunities,<br />

time and spaces for relati<strong>on</strong>ship-building.<br />


Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>: Dignity, Justice, Trust<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

David Bloomfield (2006). On Good Terms. Clarifying Rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>. <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Report No. 14. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Research Center for C<strong>on</strong>structive C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Management.<br />

Mort<strong>on</strong> Deutsch (2014). Justice and C<strong>on</strong>flict, in: Peter T. Coleman, Mort<strong>on</strong> Deutsch<br />

and Eric C. Marcus (eds.). The Handbook of C<strong>on</strong>flict Resoluti<strong>on</strong>: Theory and<br />

Practice, 3rd ed., San Francisco, CA.: Jossey-Bass, 29–56.<br />

Nancy Fraser (2008). Reframing Justice in a Globalized World, in: Nancy Fraser<br />

(ed.). Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World,<br />

New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 12–30.<br />

D<strong>on</strong>na Hicks (2011). Dignity. The Essential Role It Plays in Resolving C<strong>on</strong>flict. New<br />

Haven, CT & L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: Yale University Press.<br />

Evelin Lindner (2006). Making Enemies: Humiliati<strong>on</strong> and Internati<strong>on</strong>al C<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

Westport, CT & L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: Praeger.<br />

Harald Müller (2013). Justice and Peace. Good Things Do Not Always Go Together,<br />

in: Gunther Hellmann (ed.). Justice and Peace: Interdisciplinary Perspectives<br />

<strong>on</strong> a C<strong>on</strong>tested Relati<strong>on</strong>ship, Frankfurt am Main: campus, 43–69.<br />

Online Resources<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, Caucasus Programme, https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/<br />

en/programmes/caucasus/<br />

Human Dignity and Humiliati<strong>on</strong> Studies Network, www.humiliati<strong>on</strong>studies.org<br />

Roy J. Lewicki & Edward C. Tomlins<strong>on</strong> (2003). Trust and Trust Building, www.<br />

bey<strong>on</strong>dintractability.org/essay/trust_building/<br />

Michelle Parlevliet (2011). Human Rights and C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>: Towards<br />

a More Intergrated Approach, in: Austin, B., Fischer, M. and Giessmann, H.J.<br />

(eds.): Advancing C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>: The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook II. Opladen/<br />

Farmingt<strong>on</strong> Hills: Barbara Budrich Publishers. Also: https://www.berghoffoundati<strong>on</strong>.org/en/publicati<strong>on</strong>s/handbook/handbook-dialogues/<br />

Step-by-Step De-Escalati<strong>on</strong> (GRIT). Internati<strong>on</strong>al Online Training Project <strong>on</strong><br />

Intractable C<strong>on</strong>flict, http://www.peace.ca/glossaryUColorado.htm<br />


Breaking Deadlocks: Peace Process Support<br />

3 Breaking Deadlocks:<br />

Peace Process Support<br />

Dalia Barsoum, Izzat Kushbakov, Le<strong>on</strong>a Hollasch<br />

and Armani Gambaryan, with S<strong>on</strong>ja Neuweiler<br />

“Crises and deadlocks when they occur have at least this<br />

advantage – that they force us to think.”<br />

Jawaharlal Nehru<br />

One of the basic insights from protracted c<strong>on</strong>flicts is that it takes<br />

time – not <strong>on</strong>ly years, but often decades – to overcome the risk of<br />

relapse into violence. In many cases, protracted c<strong>on</strong>flicts move<br />

through l<strong>on</strong>g and painful phases of “no war, no peace”. Peace<br />

processes that do not also transform the c<strong>on</strong>flict at hand by addressing<br />

root causes will hardly be sustainable. Based <strong>on</strong> this<br />

recogniti<strong>on</strong>, the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, al<strong>on</strong>g with many activists,<br />


Breaking Deadlocks: Peace Process Support<br />

DEADLOCK | a situati<strong>on</strong>, typically <strong>on</strong>e involving opposing parties,<br />

in which progress appears impossible due to the unwillingness<br />

or inability of the parties.<br />

PEACE PROCESS | a series of talks, agreements and activities<br />

designed to end war or violence between two groups. Peace<br />

processes may include formal and informal mechanisms, and<br />

involve a multitude of actors often over a l<strong>on</strong>g period.<br />

peacebuilding practiti<strong>on</strong>ers and internati<strong>on</strong>al actors is focusing<br />

attenti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> advancing sustainable peace support efforts.<br />

Mechanisms and actors<br />

Nati<strong>on</strong>al and local actors are key in initiating, driving and supporting<br />

peace processes. The discussi<strong>on</strong> around nati<strong>on</strong>al peace<br />

support structures or → Establishing Infrastructures for Peace<br />

emphasises the importance of establishing formal, semi-formal<br />

and informal mechanisms for cooperati<strong>on</strong> am<strong>on</strong>g the c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

parties and more permanent networks and instituti<strong>on</strong>s to support<br />

peace processes over time.<br />

Peace support structures in many c<strong>on</strong>texts also receive external<br />

assistance, often in the form of financial support but also including<br />

capacity-building, advice, process support and assistance<br />

with organisati<strong>on</strong>al development. One strand of discussi<strong>on</strong> has<br />

thus focused <strong>on</strong> comprehensive, coherent and effective peace<br />

support strategies by external actors through l<strong>on</strong>g-term development<br />

of nati<strong>on</strong>al, local and organisati<strong>on</strong>al capacities, using leverage<br />

to encourage c<strong>on</strong>flict parties to engage in peace processes and<br />

coordinating with influencers in a multilateral support strategy.<br />


Breaking Deadlocks: Peace Process Support<br />

From peace support to peace process support:<br />

evoluti<strong>on</strong> of a term …<br />

Initially, peace support operati<strong>on</strong>s were introduced to complement<br />

or replace traditi<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>cepts of peacekeeping as thirdparty<br />

military interventi<strong>on</strong>s based <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>sent of the c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

parties. Peace support operati<strong>on</strong>s came to encompass more<br />

robust mandates for peace enforcement, but they also shifted<br />

towards recognising the importance of civilian support for UN<br />

peacekeeping and peace enforcement operati<strong>on</strong>s. Since then,<br />

the focus of “peace support” efforts has increasingly evolved<br />

to include more medium- and l<strong>on</strong>g-term efforts by internal and<br />

external actors, ranging from process-oriented support such as<br />

dialogue and mediati<strong>on</strong> to establishing more instituti<strong>on</strong>alised<br />

infrastructures promoting human rights, rule of law or multiparty<br />

democracy.<br />

Deadlocks: how they occur<br />

Peace processes to end protracted c<strong>on</strong>flicts remain fragile and<br />

are c<strong>on</strong>tinuously at risk of being blocked or stalled. These deadlocks<br />

can be caused by a number of factors.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>tentious issues and positi<strong>on</strong>s: Peace processes can accentuate<br />

existing ideological incompatibilities or bring forward new<br />

c<strong>on</strong>tentious issues. This can prompt the c<strong>on</strong>flict parties to reject<br />

talks and stop the process, fearing that negotiating would mean<br />

aband<strong>on</strong>ing their beliefs. In such cases, the parties often see<br />

either too few or too many favourable outcomes of the negotiati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

With too few opti<strong>on</strong>s, they hope the other party will be the<br />

<strong>on</strong>e to shift positi<strong>on</strong> in their favour. With too many favourable<br />

opti<strong>on</strong>s and in an attempt to get the best possible outcome for<br />

themselves, they fear that being satisfied with several opti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

might be perceived as a sign of weakness. They therefore block<br />

the process altogether.<br />


Breaking Deadlocks: Peace Process Support<br />

Fricti<strong>on</strong>s around trust, interests and relati<strong>on</strong>ships: Peace talks<br />

touch up<strong>on</strong> the vested, if not existential interests of the c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

parties in a situati<strong>on</strong> where relati<strong>on</strong>s between parties and social<br />

groups more broadly are characterised by deep divisi<strong>on</strong>s, grievances,<br />

atrocities and violence – in many cases directly blamed <strong>on</strong><br />

the other sides involved in the negotiati<strong>on</strong>s. Often, experiences<br />

of unfulfilled commitments in previous rounds of negotiati<strong>on</strong>s or<br />

doubts about the other parties’ intenti<strong>on</strong>s and seriousness prevail.<br />

Certain actors may c<strong>on</strong>tinue to benefit from the status quo<br />

and are therefore interested in sustaining deadlocks and seeking<br />

to undermine efforts to reach a settlement. These benefits may<br />

be financial and ec<strong>on</strong>omic, such as access to resources, rents or<br />

the profits of war ec<strong>on</strong>omies. However, they may also be political,<br />

with parties justifying a c<strong>on</strong>tinued grip <strong>on</strong> power and strengthening<br />

their support bases by inciting against other groups or portraying<br />

themselves as a protective shield or guarantor of certain<br />

group rights or privileges.<br />

Shortcomings in process design: Deadlocks can also result from<br />

procedural shortcomings in the design of a peace process. An<br />

example is insufficient preparati<strong>on</strong> of the process or the parties<br />

themselves, leading to uncertainty am<strong>on</strong>g key actors or lack of<br />

trust in the process – sometimes caused by a desire or pressure<br />

to achieve quick results. Shortcomings may also arise from the<br />

lack of support structures for problem-solving (in informal and<br />

formal settings) or for the development of safety nets or alternative<br />

opti<strong>on</strong>s to generate and sustain broader support for the process.<br />

The process architecture may also be negatively affected by<br />

the exclusi<strong>on</strong> of key actors or lack of mechanisms to deal with<br />

elite or popular resistance. In third party-mediated processes,<br />

percepti<strong>on</strong>s relating to the impartiality, competence or commitment<br />

of the mediating party may also lead to deadlocks until<br />

trust can be restored or, more often, the mediating party is replaced.<br />


Breaking Deadlocks: Peace Process Support<br />

Deadlocks: how to break them<br />

Peace support actors can help in preventing deadlocks through<br />

elements of process design or safety nets or can support efforts<br />

to overcome deadlocks in order to prevent and avoid a complete<br />

breakdown of the process.<br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> investigated many other mechanisms<br />

for deadlock-breaking while preparing a Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue<br />

Handbook in 2017. They include:<br />

Formal and semi-formal structures and mechanisms, informal<br />

and ad hoc mechanisms<br />

When deadlocks hinder the c<strong>on</strong>tinuati<strong>on</strong> of talks, it may be helpful<br />

to bring together a small deadlock-breaking team comprising<br />

problem-solving-oriented individuals from each side who may<br />

find it easier to reach agreement <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>tentious issues in this<br />

more c<strong>on</strong>centrated setting. Depending <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>text and process,<br />

these mechanisms can either be integrated in the design of<br />

the process as a formal or semi-formal structure or the process<br />

itself can be organised in an informal or ad hoc manner.<br />

For example …<br />

During the Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue C<strong>on</strong>ference in Yemen, the participants<br />

quickly realised that the working groups needed a way to<br />

overcome deadlocks in their discussi<strong>on</strong>s. A deadlock-breaking<br />

mechanism was therefore put into place in the shape of a C<strong>on</strong>sensus<br />

Committee. Whenever the plenary was unable to reach<br />

c<strong>on</strong>sensus <strong>on</strong> an issue, it was taken to the Committee. The<br />

compositi<strong>on</strong> of the Committee mirrored that of the C<strong>on</strong>ference,<br />

c<strong>on</strong>sisting of the heads of all decisi<strong>on</strong>-making bodies, and was<br />

tasked with proposing adjustments that made an agreement in<br />

the working groups possible. In this way, the c<strong>on</strong>tentious issues<br />

could be dealt with individually by a representative group able to<br />

reach a soluti<strong>on</strong>.<br />


Breaking Deadlocks: Peace Process Support<br />

Public c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>s/referenda and reference to wider audiences<br />

and third parties<br />

Experience has repeatedly shown that c<strong>on</strong>necting all tracks in an<br />

inclusive process offers the greatest potential for a transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

towards sustainable peace. Peace support actors engaged<br />

in process design thus aim to establish processes that actively<br />

include not <strong>on</strong>ly the elite but also the broader public down to the<br />

grassroots (→Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>). Inclusive processes<br />

not <strong>on</strong>ly bring parties closer to an agreement but also help prevent<br />

and address deadlocks, since public opini<strong>on</strong> is often a c<strong>on</strong>tributory<br />

factor to processes stalling. On the other hand, public<br />

opini<strong>on</strong>s and percepti<strong>on</strong>s of the negotiati<strong>on</strong>s can give the c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

parties the necessary impetus to move the peace process forward.<br />

For example …<br />

In the c<strong>on</strong>text of the Abkhaz-Georgian-South Ossetian c<strong>on</strong>flict,<br />

the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s Caucasus Programme focuses <strong>on</strong><br />

building bridges between estranged communities through local<br />

history dialogues. Implementing a “three-tiered gearwheel approach”,<br />

the team found that c<strong>on</strong>structive and self-critical reflecti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

<strong>on</strong> the past, involving individuals and groups, and upscaling<br />

these discussi<strong>on</strong>s to the public debate level can achieve the<br />

greatest possible inclusivity in the process and spark collective<br />

reflecti<strong>on</strong> processes. In a first step, “gearwheel <strong>on</strong>e”, project<br />

groups collected their perspectives <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>flict, escalati<strong>on</strong><br />

of violence and war in an interview format. “Gearwheel two”,<br />

c<strong>on</strong>sisting of intergenerati<strong>on</strong>al discussi<strong>on</strong> rounds, gave space to<br />

people from different age groups to come together and reflect <strong>on</strong><br />

their experiences and listen to others. “Gearwheel three” then<br />

took the dialogue up to a public level using TV talkshow or radio<br />

formats. This initiated a wider process of public reflecti<strong>on</strong>.<br />


Breaking Deadlocks: Peace Process Support<br />

Collective strategic thinking processes<br />

In situati<strong>on</strong>s of intractable c<strong>on</strong>flict, where parties refuse encounters<br />

with others or lack internal cohesi<strong>on</strong>, a new model by the<br />

Oxford Research Group (2017) proposes intra-party “collective<br />

strategic thinking”. These structured thinking processes within<br />

the parties <strong>on</strong> their identity, the c<strong>on</strong>flict c<strong>on</strong>text, their own<br />

strategic goals and alternative means of achieving them and an<br />

explorati<strong>on</strong> of the opp<strong>on</strong>ent’s perspective lay the ground for (rekindling)<br />

c<strong>on</strong>structive inter-party engagement.<br />

While some of the mechanisms menti<strong>on</strong>ed above aim to resp<strong>on</strong>d<br />

to an existing situati<strong>on</strong> and are utilised to address deadlocks in<br />

a specific process, others, like l<strong>on</strong>g-term process support, safety<br />

nets and comm<strong>on</strong> spaces, have a broader functi<strong>on</strong>. They can<br />

serve as sustainable mechanisms to protect a process from collapsing<br />

or to prevent deadlocks from occurring. In the l<strong>on</strong>g term,<br />

safety nets can be seen as an important part of the → Establishing<br />

Infrastructure for Peace. They include c<strong>on</strong>tinuous dialogue<br />

initiatives, comm<strong>on</strong> spaces, local dialogues, and other civil society<br />

and expert engagement in formal peace processes. The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>tinues to support the creati<strong>on</strong> of such spaces<br />

in many c<strong>on</strong>flict arenas around the world.<br />


Breaking Deadlocks: Peace Process Support<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Christopher W. Moore (2014). The Mediati<strong>on</strong> Process – Practical Strategies for<br />

Resolving C<strong>on</strong>flict. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.<br />

Amrita Narlikar (ed.) (2010): Deadlocks in Multilateral Negotiati<strong>on</strong>s: Causes and<br />

Soluti<strong>on</strong>s Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />

Norbert Ropers (2017). Basics of Dialogue Facilitati<strong>on</strong>. Berlin/Tübingen: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong>. [ Also available in Arabic and Spanish.]<br />

Andrea Zemskov-Züge and Oliver Wolleh (2018). “Changing the Past in our<br />

Heads”: A facilitator’s guide to listening workshops. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Online Resources<br />

ACCORD (2009). “Ending war: the need for peace process support strategies”.<br />

Policy Brief. L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: C<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> Resources. http://c-r.org/downloads/<br />

Endingwar_policybrief_2009.pdf.<br />

CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, Cumulative Impact Studies, www.cdainc.com.<br />

Marike Blunck et al. (2017). Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue Handbook: A Guide for<br />

Practiti<strong>on</strong>ers. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>. https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

org/programmes/mediati<strong>on</strong>-dialogue-support/c<strong>on</strong>ceptual-development/<br />

nati<strong>on</strong>al-dialogue-handbook/<br />

Oxford Research Group [Emily Morgan and Oliver Ramsbotham] (2017): ORG’s<br />

Collective Strategic Thinking Model. L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: Oxford Research Group. www.<br />

oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/orgs-collective-strategic-thinking-model.<br />


Building and Sustaining Peace<br />

4 Building and Sustaining<br />

Peace<br />

Sebastian Sönsken, Anne Kruck and Zina El-Nahel<br />

“The beauty of peace is in trying to find soluti<strong>on</strong>s together.”<br />

Dekha Ibrahim Abdi<br />

What is peace? In debates about peace definiti<strong>on</strong>s, the distincti<strong>on</strong><br />

between negative and positive peace put forward by Johan<br />

Galtung has gained broad acceptance. Negative peace describes<br />

peace as the absence of war or direct physical violence. A positive<br />

noti<strong>on</strong> of peace includes the increase in social justice and<br />

the creati<strong>on</strong> of a culture of peace am<strong>on</strong>g people within and<br />

across societies. This is the understanding of peace that informs<br />

the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s approach.<br />


Building and Sustaining Peace<br />

PEACE | a complex, l<strong>on</strong>g-term and multi-layered process, in which<br />

it is possible to identify steps towards peace and measure the decrease<br />

of violence and increase of justice. The multi-layered character<br />

of peace means that not <strong>on</strong>ly governments but also stakeholders<br />

at all levels of societies are resp<strong>on</strong>sible for it.<br />

PEACEBUILDING | a generic term to cover all activities intended<br />

to encourage and promote peaceful relati<strong>on</strong>s and overcoming violence.<br />

A l<strong>on</strong>g-term process that seeks to positively alter structural<br />

c<strong>on</strong>tradicti<strong>on</strong>s, improve relati<strong>on</strong>s between the c<strong>on</strong>flict parties<br />

and encourage overall c<strong>on</strong>structive changes in attitudes. It may<br />

also refer to activities c<strong>on</strong>nected with ec<strong>on</strong>omic development,<br />

social justice, rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>, empowerment of disadvantaged/<br />

strategic groups and humanitarian support.<br />

A frequent criticism of positive peace is that it lacks c<strong>on</strong>ceptual<br />

clarity. N<strong>on</strong>etheless, most scholars agree that peace is a complex,<br />

l<strong>on</strong>g-term and multi-layered process, in which it is possible<br />

to identify steps towards peace and measure the decrease of<br />

violence and increase of justice. The multi-layered character of<br />

peace means that not <strong>on</strong>ly governments but stakeholders at all<br />

levels of societies are resp<strong>on</strong>sible for it.<br />

Steps for peace<br />

Working toward peace requires at least three fundamental steps:<br />

First, a visi<strong>on</strong> of peace must be articulated. Peace <strong>on</strong> an individual<br />

level obviously differs from internati<strong>on</strong>al peace; researchers,<br />

politicians and artists all use the term “peace” in different ways,<br />

and interpretati<strong>on</strong>s vary according to culture. In some societies<br />

the word “peace” may even cause resentment due to experiences<br />

of oppressi<strong>on</strong> inflicted in the name of peace. Peace definiti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

are therefore c<strong>on</strong>text-specific. Developing comm<strong>on</strong> peace visi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

is an important aspect of peace work.<br />


Building and Sustaining Peace<br />

Sec<strong>on</strong>d, it is crucial to specify the c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s for peace in or between<br />

societies, with a view to establishing these c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s. In<br />

his analysis of the historical emergence of peace within western<br />

societies, Dieter Senghaas identified six crucial c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s and<br />

put them together as a “civilisatory hexag<strong>on</strong>”: power m<strong>on</strong>opoly,<br />

rule of law, interdependence and affect c<strong>on</strong>trol, democratic participati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

social justice and a c<strong>on</strong>structive culture of c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

(see → Educating for Peace).<br />

Third, comparing the current realities in a given society with<br />

the peace visi<strong>on</strong>, it is essential to find out what peace-supporting<br />

structures, instituti<strong>on</strong>s or attitudes need to be created or<br />

strengthened. A wide range of strategies and methods are used<br />

to make, keep, build or sustain peace <strong>on</strong> different actor levels<br />

(often also referred to as tracks). Peace efforts can be undertaken<br />

by actors <strong>on</strong> all levels and across several levels and tracks (see<br />

Figure 1).<br />

From peacebuilding to sustaining peace<br />

In his Agenda for Peace, former UN Secretary-General Boutros<br />

Boutros-Ghali (1992) described peacebuilding as a major instrument<br />

for securing peace in post-war situati<strong>on</strong>s. This narrowly-defined<br />

approach was criticised by the Advisory Group of Experts<br />

who reviewed the peacebuilding architecture of the UN in 2015.<br />

The group called for the broader c<strong>on</strong>cept of “sustaining peace”<br />

which puts more emphasis <strong>on</strong> the preventi<strong>on</strong> of violent c<strong>on</strong>flict to<br />

“save succeeding generati<strong>on</strong>s from the scourge of war” as stated<br />

in the UN Charter. They see “sustaining peace” as an overarching<br />

term including preventi<strong>on</strong>, peacemaking and peacekeeping,<br />

as well as peacebuilding, post-war recovery and rec<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong>.<br />

This paradigm shift within the UN has come about in the course<br />

of the adopti<strong>on</strong> of the Sustainable Development Goals. Although<br />

<strong>on</strong>ly Goal 16 relates directly to peace – “promote peaceful and<br />

inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access<br />

to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive<br />

instituti<strong>on</strong>s at all levels” – all 17 Goals are interc<strong>on</strong>nected and<br />


Building and Sustaining Peace<br />

Pyramid of peacebuilding<br />

Types of actors<br />

Level 1 . Top Leadership<br />

Military / political / religious<br />

leaders with high visibility<br />

Approaches to Building Peace<br />

Focus <strong>on</strong> high-level negotiati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

Emphasises cease-fire<br />

Led by highly visible, single<br />

mediator<br />

Level 2 . Middle Range Leadership<br />

Leaders respected in sectors<br />

Ethnic / religious leaders<br />

Academic / intellectuals<br />

Humanitarian leaders (NGOs)<br />

Problem-solving workshops<br />

Training in c<strong>on</strong>flict resoluti<strong>on</strong><br />

Peace commissi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

Insider-partial teams Affected<br />

Populati<strong>on</strong><br />

Level 3 . Grassroots Leadership<br />

Local leaders<br />

Leaders of indigenous NGOs<br />

Community developers<br />

Local health officials<br />

Refugee camp leaders<br />

Local peace commissi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

Grassroots training<br />

Prejudice reducti<strong>on</strong><br />

Psychosocial work in postwar<br />

trauma<br />

Figure 1, source: John Paul Lederach, 1997<br />

relevant for the achievement of positive peace, such as quality<br />

of educati<strong>on</strong>, access to food and clean water or health services.<br />

Although the term “sustaining peace” might be new, comprehensive<br />

understandings of peacebuilding are not. Scholars<br />

and civil society organisati<strong>on</strong>s have l<strong>on</strong>g promoted peacebuilding<br />

approaches which include preventive measures. These<br />

can be applied in all stages of c<strong>on</strong>flict and are also needed in<br />

relatively peaceful societies. Peacebuilding covers all activities<br />

aimed at promoting peace and overcoming violence in a society.<br />


Building and Sustaining Peace<br />

Although most activities <strong>on</strong> track 2 and 3 are carried out by civil<br />

society actors, the establishment of links to track 1 is c<strong>on</strong>sidered<br />

essential for sustainable transformati<strong>on</strong> of societies. While<br />

external agents can facilitate and support peacebuilding, ultimately<br />

it must be driven by local actors, often called agents of<br />

peaceful change. It cannot be imposed from the outside. Some<br />

peacebuilding work d<strong>on</strong>e by internati<strong>on</strong>al organisati<strong>on</strong>s is criticised<br />

for being too bureaucratic, orientated towards short-term<br />

timeframes, and financially dependent <strong>on</strong> governmental d<strong>on</strong>ors<br />

and therefore accountable to them but not to the people <strong>on</strong> the<br />

ground. It thus seems to reinforce the status quo instead of calling<br />

for a deep transformati<strong>on</strong> of structural injustices. Transformative<br />

peacebuilding needs to address social justice issues and<br />

should respect the principles of partnership, multipartiality and<br />

inclusivity (→ Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict).<br />

Peacebuilding, which seeks to sustain positive peace, is not a<br />

rapid resp<strong>on</strong>se tool but a l<strong>on</strong>g-term process of <strong>on</strong>going work for<br />

all societies in the following three dimensi<strong>on</strong>s:<br />

1. Altering structural injustices is widely regarded as essential for<br />

lasting peace. Important elements are state-building and democratisati<strong>on</strong><br />

measures, the reform of structures that reproduce the<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict (e. g. the educati<strong>on</strong> system), ec<strong>on</strong>omic and sustainable<br />

development, social justice and human rights, empowerment of<br />

civil society and c<strong>on</strong>structive media (→ Establishing Infrastructures<br />

for Peace; → Addressing Social Grievances; → Empowerment<br />

and Ownership).<br />

2. Improving relati<strong>on</strong>s between the c<strong>on</strong>flict parties is an integral<br />

part of peacebuilding to reduce the effects of war-related hostility<br />

and disrupted communicati<strong>on</strong> between the c<strong>on</strong>flict parties.<br />

Programmes of rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>, trust building and dealing with<br />

the past aim to transform damaged relati<strong>on</strong>ships (→ Dealing<br />

with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice). They deal with the n<strong>on</strong>material<br />

effects of violent c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />


Building and Sustaining Peace<br />

Sustaining peace as an overarching term<br />

Preventi<strong>on</strong><br />

Fulfilment of the 17 Sustainable<br />

Development Goals: no<br />

poverty, good health, quality<br />

educati<strong>on</strong>, gender equality,<br />

etc.<br />

Peacemaking<br />

Diplomatic efforts to end violence<br />

and to achieve a peace<br />

agreement, e. g. negotiati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

mediati<strong>on</strong>, arbitrati<strong>on</strong> and<br />

judicial settlement<br />

Table 1, source: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

3. Changing individual attitudes and behaviour is the third dimensi<strong>on</strong><br />

of peacebuilding. It means strengthening individual<br />

peace capacities, breaking stereotypes, empowering formerly<br />

disadvantaged groups, and healing trauma and psychological<br />

wounds of war. One frequently used measure for strengthening<br />

individual peace capacities is training people in n<strong>on</strong>-violent acti<strong>on</strong><br />

and c<strong>on</strong>flict resoluti<strong>on</strong> (→ Educating for Peace).<br />

Many peacebuilding measures seek to have a greater impact by<br />

combining strategies, which encompass all three dimensi<strong>on</strong>s (e.<br />

g. bringing former c<strong>on</strong>flict parties together to work <strong>on</strong> improving<br />

their ec<strong>on</strong>omic situati<strong>on</strong> and thus changing individual attitudes).<br />

Yet peacebuilding actors and organisati<strong>on</strong>s are still struggling to<br />

make their work more effective and to generate “collective impact”<br />

(see Woodrow 2017). Given the wide variety of peacebuilding<br />

approaches, it is therefore important to identify, cluster and<br />

publish best-practice examples to create learning opportunities<br />

for all present and future peacebuilders.<br />


Building and Sustaining Peace<br />

Peacekeeping<br />

For example, deployment<br />

of armed forces to enforce<br />

a ceasefire agreement and<br />

m<strong>on</strong>itor peace processes in<br />

post-war societies<br />

Peacebuilding<br />

Includes post-war recovery<br />

and rec<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong>.<br />

For example, demobilising<br />

and reintegrating combatants;<br />

assisting the return of<br />

refugees; supporting justice<br />

and security sector reform;<br />

fostering rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong><br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Johan Galtung (1996). Peace by Peaceful Means – Peace and C<strong>on</strong>flict, Development<br />

and Civilizati<strong>on</strong>. Oslo: PRIO.<br />

John Paul Lederach (2010). The Moral Imaginati<strong>on</strong>: The Art and Soul of Building<br />

Peace. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br />

Dieter Senghaas (2007). On Perpetual Peace: A Timely Assessment. New York/<br />

Oxford: Berghahn Books.<br />

Online Resources<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> (2014). What is peace? A movie for children. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong>. www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/programmes/peace-educati<strong>on</strong>global-learning/frieden-fragende/.<br />

Internati<strong>on</strong>al Peace Institute (2017). Sustaining Peace: What does it mean in<br />

practice? New York: IPI. www.ipinst.org/2017/04/sustaining-peace-inpractice.<br />

Oxford Research Group [Emily Morgan and Oliver Ramsbotham] (2017): ORG’s<br />

Collective Strategic Thinking Model. L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: Oxford Research Group. www.<br />

oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/orgs-collective-strategic-thinking-model.<br />

Peter Woodrow (2017). Framework for Collective Impact in Peacebuilding. Versi<strong>on</strong><br />

for field applicati<strong>on</strong> & testing. Cambridge, MA: CDA. cdacollaborative.org/<br />

publicati<strong>on</strong>/framework-collective-impact-peacebuilding/.<br />


Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice<br />

5. Dealing with the Past and<br />

Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice<br />

Victoria Cochrane-Buchmüller, Priscilla Megalaa,<br />

Rebecca Davis and Beatrix Austin<br />

“Unrec<strong>on</strong>ciled issues from past violence never disappear simply<br />

by default.”<br />

David Bloomfield<br />

For those who have lived, researched or supported people in<br />

post-war societies that have suffered a history of (mass) violence,<br />

addressing the legacies of past violence is of crucial importance.<br />

In its many forms, it will help shape both the present and the<br />

future. Different ways of doing this have emerged over the past<br />

decades, am<strong>on</strong>g them transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice, rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> and<br />

dealing with the past. Each of these fields is defined in a slightly<br />


Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice<br />

DEALING WITH THE PAST | an overarching term referring to a set of<br />

measures carried out in relati<strong>on</strong> to past injustice and harm which<br />

at the same time create a fair society in the present and better<br />

prospects for sustainable peace and development in the future.<br />

TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE | a broad range of processes by which<br />

countries emerging from periods of c<strong>on</strong>flict and repressi<strong>on</strong> address<br />

large-scale or systematic human rights violati<strong>on</strong>s for which<br />

the normal justice system would not be able to provide an adequate<br />

resp<strong>on</strong>se.<br />

RECONCILIATION | strives to provide a comm<strong>on</strong> frame of reference<br />

for societies to acknowledge the past, creating space for individual/nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

restorati<strong>on</strong> and healing by changing the nature of<br />

the relati<strong>on</strong>ship between the c<strong>on</strong>flicting parties as part of a l<strong>on</strong>gterm<br />

communal relati<strong>on</strong>ship-(re-)building process.<br />

TRANSFORMATIVE JUSTICE | a forward-looking agenda attempting<br />

to address a society’s grievances expressed in a violent past<br />

and drive a transformati<strong>on</strong> of structural inequalities to promote<br />

social justice and sustainable peace.<br />

different and somewhat overlapping way, and each has its followers<br />

and detractors. Lately, the new paradigm of transformative<br />

justice has gained increasing attenti<strong>on</strong> from scholars and<br />

practiti<strong>on</strong>ers alike.<br />

Transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice, rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>, and dealing with the past<br />

As it is now understood, transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice refers to a broad<br />

range of processes by which countries emerging from periods of<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict and repressi<strong>on</strong> address large-scale or systematic human<br />

rights violati<strong>on</strong>s for which the normal justice system would not<br />

be able to provide an adequate resp<strong>on</strong>se.<br />

Legal experts have extensively published <strong>on</strong> the development<br />

and capacities of internati<strong>on</strong>al, hybrid or domestic courts, the<br />


Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice<br />

most prominent being the internati<strong>on</strong>al criminal tribunals for<br />

Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, the hybrid courts for Sierra<br />

Le<strong>on</strong>e and Leban<strong>on</strong> and in more recent years, the use of universal<br />

jurisdicti<strong>on</strong> to prosecute war crimes in nati<strong>on</strong>al jurisdicti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

While its focus remains largely <strong>on</strong> accountability, and the domestic<br />

and internati<strong>on</strong>al legal mechanisms for achieving this, attenti<strong>on</strong><br />

is increasingly being paid to the role of other disciplines,<br />

such as social sciences and history, as well as fields of practice,<br />

such as support services for victims of violence. In additi<strong>on</strong>, c<strong>on</strong>venti<strong>on</strong>al<br />

forms of justice, memory work, rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> initiatives<br />

and educati<strong>on</strong> reform have been incorporated into the field.<br />

These additi<strong>on</strong>al practices have broadened the variety of transiti<strong>on</strong>al<br />

justice approaches that go bey<strong>on</strong>d legal and instituti<strong>on</strong>al<br />

mechanisms in order to resp<strong>on</strong>d to wider political and social processes,<br />

without transforming its core.<br />

Local traditi<strong>on</strong>s of justice are a valuable additi<strong>on</strong> to the nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice framework. However, these practices should<br />

be incorporated and applied with care, as some community-based<br />

justice processes may amplify existing discriminatory or abusive<br />

practices. An effective example of employing the traditi<strong>on</strong>al customs<br />

of transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice can be found in Mozambique, where<br />

“cleansing cerem<strong>on</strong>ies offered ex-combatants a way to reintegrate<br />

into communities by renouncing violence, acknowledging<br />

wr<strong>on</strong>g-doing and providing victims, or families of victims, with<br />

some kind of compensati<strong>on</strong>” (ICTJ and DPKO 2009, 13).<br />

Rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> is based <strong>on</strong> the acknowledgement of past injustice,<br />

the acceptance of resp<strong>on</strong>sibility and steps towards (re-)building<br />

trust. It is often understood as going bey<strong>on</strong>d formal c<strong>on</strong>flict resoluti<strong>on</strong><br />

to changing the nature of the relati<strong>on</strong>ship between the<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flicting parties as part of a l<strong>on</strong>g-term communal relati<strong>on</strong>ship-<br />

(re-)building process.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>fr<strong>on</strong>ting the past in a rec<strong>on</strong>ciliatory way may include a variety<br />

of approaches. David Bloomfield and his colleagues acknowledge<br />

that while political and nati<strong>on</strong>al rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> may<br />


Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice<br />

be achieved through truth-telling (e. g. truth commissi<strong>on</strong>s), individual<br />

rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> is a more pers<strong>on</strong>al process that is difficult<br />

to achieve. Although the c<strong>on</strong>cept is ambivalent and difficult to<br />

measure, as Alexander Boraine argues, there is a need to achieve<br />

at least a measure of rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> by creating a “comm<strong>on</strong> memory”<br />

that can be acknowledged by those who have implemented<br />

an unjust system, those who fought against it, and those who<br />

were bystanders. More than an end goal, rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> processes<br />

provide a comm<strong>on</strong> frame of reference for societies to acknowledge<br />

the past, creating space for individual/nati<strong>on</strong>al restorati<strong>on</strong><br />

and healing.<br />

As with other terminology, there is no codified understanding of<br />

the phrase “dealing with the past”. At the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

the term is used as an overarching umbrella that refers to a set<br />

of measures carried out in relati<strong>on</strong> to past injustice and harm<br />

which at the same time create a fair society in the present and<br />

better prospects for sustainable peace and development in the<br />

future. Dealing with the past has an open “repertoire”, into<br />

which both transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice and rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> mechanisms<br />

may fall. It is a holistic process, which may span generati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

and requires analysis and acti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> many different levels; both<br />

pers<strong>on</strong>al and public elements must be addressed al<strong>on</strong>g with integrati<strong>on</strong><br />

of victims, perpetrators and bystanders. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally,<br />

feminist research has revealed that a better understanding of the<br />

gendered experience of violence and justice, culture and power<br />

structures is needed to appropriately analyse the causes, dynamics<br />

and c<strong>on</strong>sequences of c<strong>on</strong>flict and violence.<br />

Transformative justice as a new paradigm?<br />

The discussi<strong>on</strong>s surrounding transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice, rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong><br />

and dealing with the past have embraced a forward-looking<br />

agenda in the form of transformative justice. A transformative<br />

approach attempts to address a society’s grievances and drive a<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> of structural inequalities to promote social justice<br />

and sustainable peace. The trend marks a shift towards comple-<br />


Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice<br />

mentarity through integrating official top-down mechanisms<br />

with unofficial local initiatives. Paul Gready and Sim<strong>on</strong> Robins<br />

suggest that this broadening of transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice provides c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

with wider noti<strong>on</strong>s of peacebuilding and c<strong>on</strong>tributes to<br />

a holistic approach that is c<strong>on</strong>text-driven. It also strengthens local<br />

ownership, including that of survivors in an active role, and<br />

sustainability as key requirements for less top-down engagement<br />

<strong>on</strong> working through the legacies of past mass violence. A transformative<br />

approach also moves away from what Palmer terms the<br />

“internati<strong>on</strong>al orientati<strong>on</strong>” of courts and the impact that this has<br />

<strong>on</strong> the effectiveness and l<strong>on</strong>gevity of the “justice” that is achieved.<br />

Critical issues in working <strong>on</strong> the past<br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> has been active in the Western Balkans<br />

for many years. In 2013, a comparative study was c<strong>on</strong>ducted<br />

which looked at initiatives for rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> and “dealing with<br />

the past” undertaken by internati<strong>on</strong>al organisati<strong>on</strong>s, legal instituti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

and local civil society actors in resp<strong>on</strong>se to the wars of<br />

the 1990s. Am<strong>on</strong>g the many avenues of explorati<strong>on</strong>, the study<br />

found that advancement in justice and truth recovery is aided<br />

by close cooperati<strong>on</strong> with civil society actors and local communities.<br />

Although rule of law and functi<strong>on</strong>ing instituti<strong>on</strong>s for its<br />

implementati<strong>on</strong> are essential for creating a sense of fairness and<br />

justice, retributive approaches need to be complemented with<br />

restorative, community-centred strategies from the very beginning.<br />

Often this includes both victims/survivors and perpetrators.<br />

Also, our work in the Caucasus has shown the importance<br />

of storytelling and exploring biographical story-sharing across<br />

divides after violent c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s l<strong>on</strong>g-standing work with Resistance<br />

and Liberati<strong>on</strong> Movements engaged in peace processes has also<br />

touched up<strong>on</strong> the issue of transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice and the role of victims.<br />

Our work focuses <strong>on</strong> enabling peer exchange and providing<br />

tailor-made input and capacity building <strong>on</strong> various topics,<br />

including transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice.<br />


Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice<br />

A 2017 meeting of Resistance and Liberati<strong>on</strong> Movements focused<br />

<strong>on</strong> transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice in the field, the link between justice,<br />

stability of peace and l<strong>on</strong>g-term rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>, and possible<br />

models/designs, key tools and practical measures. The meeting<br />

enabled discussi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> the advantages and disadvantages of<br />

participating in transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice processes as well as <strong>on</strong> how<br />

inclusivity may be broadened through participati<strong>on</strong> by victims.<br />

Discussi<strong>on</strong>s also c<strong>on</strong>sidered the role of pris<strong>on</strong>ers in dealing with<br />

the past, and that of strategic communicati<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> all sides of the<br />

peace process. Crucial aspects highlighted by the participating<br />

groups were strategic communicati<strong>on</strong>, sequencing and c<strong>on</strong>necting<br />

the nati<strong>on</strong>al-internati<strong>on</strong>al and the traditi<strong>on</strong>al-universal approaches<br />

to transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice.<br />

While there is growing critical analysis of transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice<br />

theory and its practical implementati<strong>on</strong>, the tendency is still to<br />

focus <strong>on</strong> the l<strong>on</strong>g-debated dichotomies of peace vs. justice, and<br />

accountability vs. rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>, as well as the debates <strong>on</strong> the<br />

place of transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice in peace processes. We suggest that<br />

instead, greater attenti<strong>on</strong> should be paid to the practical applicati<strong>on</strong><br />

of transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice and its integrati<strong>on</strong> into peace processes<br />

for the benefit of those most affected by the outcomes.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Beatrix Austin and Martina Fischer (eds.) (2016). Transforming War-Related Identities:<br />

Individual and Social Approaches to Healing and Dealing with the Past.<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook Dialogue Series No. 11. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

David Bloomfield, Teresa Barnes and Luc Huyse (eds.) (2010). Rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> after<br />

Violent C<strong>on</strong>flict: A Handbook. Revised Editi<strong>on</strong>. Stockholm: IDEA.<br />

Alexander Boraine (2006). Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice: A Holistic Interpretati<strong>on</strong>. Journal of<br />

Internati<strong>on</strong>al Affairs 60(1), 17–27.<br />

Martina Fischer and Ljubinka Petrovic-Ziemer (2015). Dealing with the Past<br />

and Peacebuilding in the Western Balkans. Osnabrück: Deutsche Stiftung<br />

Friedensforschung.<br />

Paul Gready and Sim<strong>on</strong> Robins (2014). From Transiti<strong>on</strong>al to Transformative Justice:<br />

A New Agenda for Practice. Internati<strong>on</strong>al Journal of Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice 8(3),<br />

339–361.<br />


Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice<br />

ICTJ and DPKO (2009). “Module 6: DDR and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice”, in UNDDR.<br />

Integrated Disarmament, Demobilizati<strong>on</strong> and Reintegrati<strong>on</strong> Standards.<br />

UNDDR Resource Centre.<br />

Nicola Palmer 2012. Transfer or Transformati<strong>on</strong>? A Review of the Rule 11 bis Decisi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

of the Internati<strong>on</strong>al Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. African Journal of<br />

Internati<strong>on</strong>al and Comparative Law 20 (1): 1–21.<br />

Nico Schernbeck and Luxshi Vimalarajah (2017). Negotiating Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice.<br />

A Strategic Framework. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Andrea Zemskov-Züge and Oliver Wolleh (eds.) (2018). “Changing the Past in our<br />

Heads”: A facilitator’s guide to listening workshops. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Online Resources<br />

FriEnt (Working Group <strong>on</strong> Peace and Development), https://www.frient.de/en/<br />

topics-and-competencies/transiti<strong>on</strong>al-justice-and-development/<br />

“Making Peace with the Past: Transforming Broken Relati<strong>on</strong>ships” (2016). Accord<br />

Insight 3. L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: C<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> Resources. http://www.c-r.org/accord/<br />

rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>-and-peace-processes-insight<br />

Centre for N<strong>on</strong>violent Acti<strong>on</strong> (2014). Rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>?! Training Handbook for<br />

Dealing with the Past. Sarajevo/Belgrade: CNA. https://nenasilje.org/<br />

en/2012/rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>-training-handbook-for-dealing-with-the-past/<br />


Educating for Peace<br />

6 Educating for Peace<br />

Uli Jäger<br />

“That since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds<br />

of men that the defences of peace must be c<strong>on</strong>structed.”<br />

UNESCO<br />

Peace educati<strong>on</strong> is the process of acquiring the values and<br />

knowledge and developing the attitudes, skills and behaviour to<br />

live in harm<strong>on</strong>y with <strong>on</strong>eself, with others, and with the natural<br />

envir<strong>on</strong>ment. It aims to reduce violence, support the transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

of c<strong>on</strong>flicts, and advance the peace capabilities of individuals,<br />

groups, societies and instituti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

Peace educati<strong>on</strong> builds <strong>on</strong> people’s capacities to learn and helps<br />

to establish a global and sustainable culture of peace. It is c<strong>on</strong>text-specific,<br />

but is essential and feasible in every world regi<strong>on</strong><br />


Educating for Peace<br />

PEACE EDUCATION | the process of acquiring the values and<br />

knowledge and developing the attitudes, skills and behaviour to<br />

live in harm<strong>on</strong>y with <strong>on</strong>eself, with others, and with the natural<br />

envir<strong>on</strong>ment. It aims to reduce violence, support the transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

of c<strong>on</strong>flicts, and advance the peace capabilities of individuals,<br />

groups, societies and instituti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

and during all stages of c<strong>on</strong>flict. Peace educati<strong>on</strong> takes place in<br />

many settings, whether formal or informal: in every-day learning<br />

and educati<strong>on</strong>, in the preparati<strong>on</strong>, implementati<strong>on</strong> and evaluati<strong>on</strong><br />

of professi<strong>on</strong>al projects with selected target groups, and<br />

in the support provided for c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive educati<strong>on</strong> systems.<br />

There is no uniform c<strong>on</strong>cept of what peace educati<strong>on</strong> should include<br />

and the internati<strong>on</strong>al discourse <strong>on</strong> this topic is still in its<br />

infancy. Various social, political, ec<strong>on</strong>omic, historical and cultural<br />

c<strong>on</strong>texts must be taken into account, al<strong>on</strong>g with the different<br />

traditi<strong>on</strong>s and levels of intensity in the systematic debate and<br />

practice of peace educati<strong>on</strong> nati<strong>on</strong>ally.<br />

Recent UN documents, such as the UNESCO c<strong>on</strong>cept of “Educati<strong>on</strong><br />

for All” and the Sustainable Development Goals (Goal<br />

4), underline the importance of peace educati<strong>on</strong>. The key prerequisite<br />

for success is the renunciati<strong>on</strong> of all forms of corporal<br />

punishment, violence and psychological pressure as a means of<br />

delivering educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Objectives of peace educati<strong>on</strong><br />

Peace educati<strong>on</strong> has four core and interdependent objectives:<br />

recogniti<strong>on</strong> of c<strong>on</strong>flicts as an opportunity for positive change,<br />

which means developing the skills for the c<strong>on</strong>structive management<br />

of c<strong>on</strong>flicts and a respectful relati<strong>on</strong>ship with those who<br />

are “other”;<br />


Educating for Peace<br />

recogniti<strong>on</strong> of different individual, social and political forms<br />

of (everyday) violence and the “fascinati<strong>on</strong> of violence”, which<br />

means promoting analysis of individual and collective experiences<br />

of violence, both past and present (→ Preventing Violence;<br />

→ Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice);<br />

analysis of the causes, impacts and after-effects of war, which<br />

means looking at possible mechanisms against and alternatives<br />

to war at the individual, social and internati<strong>on</strong>al level;<br />

the development of visi<strong>on</strong>s of peace and community life and<br />

ways of translating these visi<strong>on</strong>s into practical acti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

To implement these goals, it is necessary to create spaces in<br />

which learning processes can develop. These learning spaces for<br />

peace are based <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>cept and implementati<strong>on</strong> of “learning<br />

arrangements”: c<strong>on</strong>text-specific, bespoke settings that take<br />

account of factors such as learning objectives, target groups,<br />

methods, timeframes and available facilities. Learning arrangements<br />

do not prescribe any form of instructi<strong>on</strong> or use manipulati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

They encourage an ethical, political and practical focus and<br />

open-ended dialogue (→ Facilitating Dialogue and Negotiati<strong>on</strong>).<br />

Essentials of peace educati<strong>on</strong><br />

Peace educati<strong>on</strong> deals systematically with major challenges to<br />

peace, such as c<strong>on</strong>flict, hostility and enemy images, violence<br />

and war. By c<strong>on</strong>sidering the many facets of violence in detail, we<br />

can develop a better understanding of violence and identify risk<br />

factors and preventi<strong>on</strong> measures.<br />

Peace is not perceived as a static c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> but as a process of<br />

decreasing violence and increasing justice (→ Building and Sustaining<br />

Peace). Peace is also not seen as an excepti<strong>on</strong> to the rule,<br />

but as the preferred rule. It thus serves as both a normative aim<br />

and a pragmatic orientati<strong>on</strong> for acti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Models such as the “civilisatory hexag<strong>on</strong>” can provide a basis for<br />

reflecti<strong>on</strong>, offering guidance and facilitating the visualisati<strong>on</strong> of<br />

linkages between normative aims. In this sense, peace educati<strong>on</strong><br />


Educating for Peace<br />

Civilisatory hexag<strong>on</strong><br />

Power<br />

m<strong>on</strong>opoly<br />

Rule of law<br />

Interdependences<br />

and affect<br />

c<strong>on</strong>trol<br />

Political<br />

participati<strong>on</strong><br />

Culture of c<strong>on</strong>structive c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

management<br />

Social justice/<br />

equity<br />

Graph by: Christoph Lang<br />

Figure 2, source: Dieter Senghaas 2007<br />

has significant overlaps with other approaches such as civics or<br />

human rights educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Peace educati<strong>on</strong> initiates and supports social and political learning<br />

processes, in which positive social behaviour, empathy and<br />

capacities for n<strong>on</strong>-violent communicati<strong>on</strong> can evolve (peace capacity);<br />

knowledge about peace and war, c<strong>on</strong>flict and violence<br />

can be acquired (peace competence); and the willingness to<br />

show civil courage and engage for peace is fostered (peace acti<strong>on</strong>).<br />

Peace educati<strong>on</strong> offers practical advice for educati<strong>on</strong> in<br />

family and preschool settings, in school and in the n<strong>on</strong>-formal<br />

educati<strong>on</strong> sector. C<strong>on</strong>flicts within society must not be c<strong>on</strong>cealed<br />

but should be made visible within the framework of peace educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

People all over the world need spaces to learn and experience<br />

peace – at the micro level of the family and in daily life as well<br />


Educating for Peace<br />

as at the macro level of society and internati<strong>on</strong>al politics. People<br />

learn from experience and benefit from inspiring learning envir<strong>on</strong>ments<br />

with appropriate multimedia-based and interactive<br />

methods. All the senses and emoti<strong>on</strong>s play an important role<br />

and need to be integrated in designing learning arrangements.<br />

Humour is an element not to be underestimated. The real-life<br />

encounter with “the other”, be it members of c<strong>on</strong>flicting parties<br />

in post-war societies, minorities and majorities or locals and migrants,<br />

is indispensable.<br />

Delivering peace educati<strong>on</strong><br />

The way in which peace educati<strong>on</strong> is delivered has an important<br />

role to play in c<strong>on</strong>vincing people of its benefits, as do the substance<br />

and credibility of the peace message. Educati<strong>on</strong> methods<br />

must be adapted to a changing social and technological envir<strong>on</strong>ment.<br />

Nowadays, the widespread use of social media offers<br />

new opportunities for educati<strong>on</strong> models. While the use and disseminati<strong>on</strong><br />

of elements like hate speech or fake news may pose<br />

threats to peaceful coexistence, social media also facilitate participati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

knowledge-sharing and freedom of speech and informati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Peace educati<strong>on</strong> should capitalise <strong>on</strong> this opportunity by using<br />

different kinds of media intensively for its purposes, making<br />

<strong>on</strong>line materials and media accessible and creating networks.<br />

For example, a youth council advises <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

project (Culture of C<strong>on</strong>flict 3.0: Learning Spaces and Media for<br />

Young People to Deal with Internet Violence and Hate), which is<br />

essential for understanding young people’s positive and negative<br />

experiences with social media. The youth council is involved,<br />

am<strong>on</strong>g other things, in developing target-group-oriented comic<br />

films – a joint effort which brings both great fun and great success.<br />

A proven peace educati<strong>on</strong> approach discusses examples of<br />

successful peacebuilding and its protag<strong>on</strong>ists. Authentic role<br />


Educating for Peace<br />

models who promote the principles of n<strong>on</strong>-violence are helpful.<br />

Outstanding educators and advocates of n<strong>on</strong>-violence (Maria<br />

M<strong>on</strong>tessori, Paolo Freire, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King)<br />

have l<strong>on</strong>g been sources of inspirati<strong>on</strong> for the theory and practice<br />

of peace educati<strong>on</strong>. They have shaped the c<strong>on</strong>cept and image of<br />

peace educati<strong>on</strong> in their respective world regi<strong>on</strong>s in a distinctive<br />

way.<br />

Methods of peace educati<strong>on</strong><br />

Peace educati<strong>on</strong> methods are based <strong>on</strong> the following practices:<br />

Exemplary learning: reality is very complex, as are c<strong>on</strong>flicts or<br />

peace processes. Case studies exemplify and make the backgrounds<br />

and the variety of (visible and less visible) relati<strong>on</strong>ships<br />

more c<strong>on</strong>crete.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>trasting and emphasising: focus attenti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> specific or determining<br />

viewpoints and problematical aspects.<br />

Change of perspective: empathy is promoted by expanding the<br />

learners’ own standpoint, which can be inflexible and deeply<br />

rooted, to allow a plurality of views.<br />

Clarity and ability to perceive linkages: using techniques such as<br />

visualisati<strong>on</strong>, problematical issues are relocated from the realm<br />

of the abstract and related to learners’ own experiences.<br />

Acti<strong>on</strong>-orientated: themes and issues are made accessible through<br />

activity and experience-based learning.<br />

Peer-orientated: shared learning is encouraged through group<br />

work and mutual support.<br />

Empowerment: building skills promotes self-c<strong>on</strong>fidence and aut<strong>on</strong>omy.<br />


Educating for Peace<br />

Types of peace educati<strong>on</strong><br />

Due to the complexity of protracted violent c<strong>on</strong>flicts and the resulting<br />

need for transformati<strong>on</strong> efforts at various levels, a comprehensive<br />

approach is required. This must bring together two<br />

fundamental types of peace educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

(1) Direct peace educati<strong>on</strong>: Key elements of this approach are<br />

about encounter, inspirati<strong>on</strong> and training. It could also be described<br />

as peace educati<strong>on</strong> for empowerment, with a focus <strong>on</strong><br />

pers<strong>on</strong>al capacity development or identity-building.<br />

(2) Structural peace educati<strong>on</strong>: This approach brings together elements<br />

that, with the aid of pilot projects, aim to develop learning<br />

modules, media and curricula, focusing <strong>on</strong> the sustainable<br />

delivery of peace educati<strong>on</strong> in the formal and n<strong>on</strong>-formal educati<strong>on</strong><br />

systems. The objective is to bring about a positive change in<br />

the structural c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s for peace.<br />

The two types are closely linked. We regard the interacti<strong>on</strong> between<br />

them as an essential prerequisite for sustainable peace<br />

educati<strong>on</strong> and its c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong> to c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>. In the<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s project Civic and N<strong>on</strong>violent Educati<strong>on</strong> in<br />

Jordan we combine training courses and dialogue workshops for<br />

multipliers <strong>on</strong> the <strong>on</strong>e hand with implementing a curriculum at<br />

universities <strong>on</strong> the other. Both processes take place in cooperati<strong>on</strong><br />

with the Ministries of Educati<strong>on</strong> and Higher Educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Evaluating peace educati<strong>on</strong><br />

Does peace educati<strong>on</strong> make the difference? Measuring the effects<br />

of peace educati<strong>on</strong> is a challenging task given the complexity and<br />

l<strong>on</strong>g-term nature of learning processes. Often, there is a lack of<br />

resources to c<strong>on</strong>duct l<strong>on</strong>g-term studies, and there is a lack of systematic<br />

experience in how evaluati<strong>on</strong> projects can be developed<br />

and applied in a c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive and c<strong>on</strong>text-related manner (→<br />

Learning Together). Nevertheless, there is an impressive variety of<br />

evaluati<strong>on</strong> approaches, which mirror the diversity of peace educati<strong>on</strong><br />

practices. In recent years, studies and evaluati<strong>on</strong>s have also<br />

dem<strong>on</strong>strated empirical evidence of peace educati<strong>on</strong> benefits.<br />


Educating for Peace<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Celina Del Felice, Aar<strong>on</strong> Karako and Andria Wisler (eds.) (2015): Peace Educati<strong>on</strong><br />

Evaluati<strong>on</strong>. Learning from Experience and Exploring Prospects. New York:<br />

Charlotte.<br />

Ian M. Harris (2004). Peace Educati<strong>on</strong> Theory, in: Journal of Peace Educati<strong>on</strong>, Vol.<br />

l, No. l, 5–20.<br />

Uli Jäger (2014). Peace Educati<strong>on</strong> and C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong> / Online <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook for C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Gavriel Salom<strong>on</strong> and Ed Cairns (eds.) (2010). Handbook <strong>on</strong> Peace Educati<strong>on</strong>. New<br />

York / L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: Taylor & Francis Group.<br />

Dieter Senghaas (2004). The Civilisati<strong>on</strong> of C<strong>on</strong>flict. C<strong>on</strong>structive Pacifism as<br />

a Guiding Noti<strong>on</strong> for C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>. In: Transforming Ethnopolitical<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict. The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook. Edited by A. Austin, M. Fischer and<br />

N. Ropers. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.<br />

Online Resources<br />

Lynne Camer<strong>on</strong> and Sim<strong>on</strong> Weatherbed (2015). Empathy Dynamics in C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Transformati<strong>on</strong>. A Manual. https://www.open.ac.uk/creet/main/sites/www.<br />

open.ac.uk.creet.main/files/files/Empathy %20Dynamics %20Manual %20<br />

(web) %20copy.pdf<br />

Global Campaign for Peace Educati<strong>on</strong> (GCPE), http://www.peace-ed-campaign.org<br />

Internati<strong>on</strong>al Network for Educati<strong>on</strong> in Emergencies, http://www.ineesite.org<br />

Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform, https://sustainabledevelopment.<br />

un.org/?menu=1300<br />


Empowerment and Ownership<br />

7 Empowerment and<br />

Ownership<br />

Feras Kheirallah and Barbara Unger<br />

“Power properly understood is nothing but the ability to achieve<br />

purpose. It is the strength required to bring about social, political<br />

and ec<strong>on</strong>omic change.”<br />

Martin Luther King, Jr.<br />

We know that inequality and limited access to opportunity are<br />

key drivers of c<strong>on</strong>flict. Groups that perceive themselves to be disadvantaged<br />

try to change their situati<strong>on</strong>, and may use n<strong>on</strong>violent<br />

(or violent) means (→ Addressing Social Grievances). When actors<br />

need to change their behaviour, attitudes and relati<strong>on</strong>ships<br />

in order to engage with each other differently, a certain degree of<br />

horiz<strong>on</strong>tality and symmetry – of informati<strong>on</strong>, capacities, access<br />


Empowerment and Ownership<br />

EMPOWERMENT | a process which enables individuals and organised<br />

groups to increase their power and aut<strong>on</strong>omy to achieve<br />

outcomes they need and desire.<br />

OWNERSHIP | c<strong>on</strong>flict stakeholders and actors having the resources<br />

to assume resp<strong>on</strong>sibility for c<strong>on</strong>flict-related challenges<br />

and all aspects of the c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> process, as this<br />

makes it both meaningful and sustainable.<br />

and power – is required. C<strong>on</strong>sequently, asymmetry of power<br />

must be dealt with: “Empowerment is a process through which<br />

individuals or organised groups increase their power and aut<strong>on</strong>omy<br />

to achieve certain outcomes they need and desire” (Eyben,<br />

cited in Combaz & Mcloughlin 2014, 4). C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

and peacebuilding need to c<strong>on</strong>sider this.<br />

Empowerment is a c<strong>on</strong>cept stemming from community sociology<br />

and has been widely explored with regard to gender relati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

It happens at several levels. Individuals who are enabled<br />

to identify and articulate their own interests can help achieve<br />

social change, just as pers<strong>on</strong>s who have c<strong>on</strong>fidence in their own<br />

skills and strength can c<strong>on</strong>tribute, for example as resp<strong>on</strong>sible<br />

citizens, to collective processes. Groups, at the next level, are key<br />

to self-empowerment. A shared noti<strong>on</strong> of their own situati<strong>on</strong>, of<br />

collective interests and of the means of achieving them creates<br />

scope for self-reliance and for engagement with the “dominant”<br />

group(s). In this way, relati<strong>on</strong>s and interacti<strong>on</strong>s can change at<br />

the societal level as well.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, empowerment and ownership<br />

In c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, Diana Francis has made the point that<br />

in order to bring structural and cultural violence, such as injustice<br />

and inequality, out of the latent stage, the disadvantaged<br />

(and ideally those who “innocently” gain from the status quo)<br />


Empowerment and Ownership<br />

Stages and processes in c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

Unequal power<br />

Oppressi<strong>on</strong>/injustice:<br />

Hidden or latent c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict resoluti<strong>on</strong><br />

C<strong>on</strong>scientisati<strong>on</strong>:<br />

Awareness raising<br />

Shifting power relati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

Mobilizati<strong>on</strong>: Group formati<strong>on</strong><br />

Empowerment for acti<strong>on</strong>:<br />

Analysis, strategy, building<br />

support<br />

Shifting power<br />

Negotiati<strong>on</strong><br />

with/without<br />

mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

Preparing for<br />

dialogue/talks<br />

with/without<br />

mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

Acti<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>fr<strong>on</strong>tati<strong>on</strong>:<br />

Open c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Relati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

Settlement<br />

Modificati<strong>on</strong><br />

of stereotypes,<br />

processing the<br />

past<br />

Rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong><br />

(Resoluti<strong>on</strong>)<br />

L<strong>on</strong>g-term co-operati<strong>on</strong>, rebuilding<br />

community, rec<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong>/development,<br />

democracy/political participati<strong>on</strong><br />

Establishing + maintaining healthy power relati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

C<strong>on</strong>stant process of peace maintenance<br />

C<strong>on</strong>structive c<strong>on</strong>flict management for<br />

violence preventi<strong>on</strong><br />

Graph by: Christoph Lang<br />

Figure 3, source: Diana Francis, 2001<br />

must increase their c<strong>on</strong>sciousness of their situati<strong>on</strong> and gain<br />

“power” to challenge it.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> and empowerment share the noti<strong>on</strong> that<br />

<strong>on</strong>ly the actors affected can build peace, and that all actors involved<br />

have resources to build <strong>on</strong>. The main role and resp<strong>on</strong>sibility<br />

for c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> hence lie with those who are<br />

affected by c<strong>on</strong>flict. A careful balance must be struck between<br />

helpful and catalytic (outside) interventi<strong>on</strong> and nurturing (local)<br />

ownership.<br />


Empowerment and Ownership<br />

The issues of ownership, power and agency are at the core of<br />

what we need to discuss when we look at empowerment in c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong>. When we opt for empowerment measures<br />

as an (external) interventi<strong>on</strong>, we need to be very careful of how<br />

these interventi<strong>on</strong>s can play out. “Do no harm” (→ Educating for<br />

Peace; → Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance) must<br />

be a guiding principle.<br />

Working with individuals, groups and instituti<strong>on</strong>s towards<br />

social change<br />

Some approaches to empowerment focus <strong>on</strong> supporting individuals<br />

and certain previously marginalised groups to have better<br />

access to resources, informati<strong>on</strong> and services, or to influence<br />

decisi<strong>on</strong>-makers and legislati<strong>on</strong> and hence improve their living<br />

c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s and situati<strong>on</strong> in a given society. The empowerment of<br />

women can serve as an example. Its purpose is to enable women<br />

first to gain a different understanding of their potential and the<br />

c<strong>on</strong>text, and also to access and play an active role in influencing<br />

(if not shaping) policy. New c<strong>on</strong>sciousness and a desire for<br />

change do not mean that the empowered women have sufficient<br />

capacities to effect changes in the face of the resistance that their<br />

empowered stance may encounter in society. Therefore, it is crucial<br />

in c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> to understand and enable empowerment<br />

by working at different levels: the individual, the group,<br />

the instituti<strong>on</strong>al and finally the societal level.<br />

While <strong>on</strong>ly pers<strong>on</strong>s and groups can be empowered, they act<br />

within an instituti<strong>on</strong>al and societal envir<strong>on</strong>ment. Thus, working<br />

with existing instituti<strong>on</strong>s to entice the people within them<br />

to play a positive role in transforming c<strong>on</strong>flicts begins with understanding<br />

the instituti<strong>on</strong>s’ history and importance within society.<br />

Ideally, this happens through a joint analysis of the stakeholders.<br />

Making these instituti<strong>on</strong>s more resp<strong>on</strong>sive to the whole<br />

of society – for example by strengthening their capacities, enhancing<br />

their internal strategies, enabling exchange with other<br />

instituti<strong>on</strong>s, supporting knowledge producti<strong>on</strong> and transfer,<br />


Empowerment and Ownership<br />

and sharing experience through mediati<strong>on</strong> and dialogue techniques<br />

– can c<strong>on</strong>tribute to transforming c<strong>on</strong>flicts, provided that<br />

the political will is there.<br />

Supporting empowerment as an external actor<br />

The role of outsiders may be to support actors in a multipartial<br />

manner by creating spaces and changing percepti<strong>on</strong>s of roles<br />

and resources. While there is a close c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong> between selfempowerment<br />

and what externals can c<strong>on</strong>tribute for this c<strong>on</strong>scientisati<strong>on</strong><br />

and change to happen, somewhat paradoxically, “to<br />

empower” has also been used as a transitive verb to describe interventi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />

especially in development cooperati<strong>on</strong> and often in<br />

relati<strong>on</strong> to gender issues, which aim to support a certain group.<br />

As Alan Sharland has rightly observed, “It is a self-c<strong>on</strong>tradicti<strong>on</strong><br />

to state <strong>on</strong> some<strong>on</strong>e’s behalf, without their explicit c<strong>on</strong>sent, that<br />

they have ‘been empowered’, or, worse that ‘we have empowered<br />

them’, as in the very act of saying so, we are speaking for them<br />

and assuming the right and power to do so.”<br />

At the individual and group level, participatory analysis of issues,<br />

factors and actors can help, as can exchanges with other<br />

groups or with experts. Training, workshops, coaching and other<br />

measures provide spaces for c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong> and reflecti<strong>on</strong>, which<br />

can lead to a change in attitude and behaviour. If, as said above,<br />

this is not sufficient to effect change, the groups might look for<br />

other mechanisms to support their cause. In Jordan, for example,<br />

independent trade uni<strong>on</strong>s were established to protest against<br />

the dysfuncti<strong>on</strong>al state-c<strong>on</strong>trolled uni<strong>on</strong>s. In such situati<strong>on</strong>s,<br />

<strong>on</strong>e may need to ask: What instituti<strong>on</strong>s are there, how would<br />

they need to change? Are new <strong>on</strong>es needed? A strategy aimed<br />

at instituti<strong>on</strong>al change can start from various angles, depending,<br />

for example, <strong>on</strong> whether the instituti<strong>on</strong> has a mandate to represent<br />

a certain group, or resp<strong>on</strong>ds to all groups’ demands, but has<br />

not fulfilled that task. It is crucial that these instituti<strong>on</strong>s have a<br />

mandate to influence the relati<strong>on</strong>ship between decisi<strong>on</strong>-makers<br />

at a macro level and those subject to policies at a micro level.<br />


Empowerment and Ownership<br />

If an external actor wants to support such a process, the need<br />

to work with core instituti<strong>on</strong>s (for example parliament), powerholders<br />

(for example men) and traditi<strong>on</strong>s (for example masculinity)<br />

will most likely come up (→ Gender and Youth). So what<br />

might support for empowerment look like in practice?<br />

External actors can best provide support by enabling internal<br />

self-reflecti<strong>on</strong> and a (gradual but sustainable) transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

process towards a collective understanding and willingness to<br />

play a role in transforming c<strong>on</strong>flicts. In resp<strong>on</strong>se to ownership issues,<br />

our main task as externals should lie in creating the space<br />

needed for these instituti<strong>on</strong>s to develop their own strategies and<br />

tools. In Leban<strong>on</strong>, the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> performs this role by<br />

supporting the official religious instituti<strong>on</strong>s in their efforts to foster<br />

coexistence and tolerance. Transformative external interventi<strong>on</strong><br />

should then support these instituti<strong>on</strong>s in better understanding<br />

or even (re-)defining their actual role and original mandate<br />

and identifying their potential (strengths) as a collective unit<br />

representing a certain group of society in c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

Our organisati<strong>on</strong>’s missi<strong>on</strong>, “creating space”, here means providing<br />

a level playing field, as far as possible, so that all actors<br />

can participate. Addressing power asymmetries is at the core of<br />

that work in many c<strong>on</strong>flict settings. Empowerment and clear local<br />

ownership of the empowerment agenda are our preferred approach<br />

for doing just that.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Diana Francis (2001). Culture, Power Asymmetries and Gender in C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

In: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook for C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>. First Online<br />

Editi<strong>on</strong>. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Centre for C<strong>on</strong>structive C<strong>on</strong>flict Management.<br />

Emilie Combaz and Claire Mcloughlin (2014). Voice, Empowerment and Accountability:<br />

Topic Guide. Birmingham, UK: GSDRC, University of Birmingham.<br />

Johan Galtung (2011). TRANSCEND Method. In The Encyclopaedia of Peace Psychology,<br />

edited by Daniel J. Christie. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.<br />


Empowerment and Ownership<br />

Hannah Reich (2006). “Local Ownership” in C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong> Projects. Partnership,<br />

Participati<strong>on</strong> or Patr<strong>on</strong>age? <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Occasi<strong>on</strong>al Paper No. 27. Berlin:<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Research Center for C<strong>on</strong>structive C<strong>on</strong>flict Management.<br />

Online Resources<br />

CDA (2016). Do No Harm Workshop Trainer’s Manual. Cambridge, MA:<br />

Collaborative Learning Projects. http://live-cdacollaborative.panthe<strong>on</strong>site.io/<br />

wp-c<strong>on</strong>tent/uploads/2017/02/Do-No-Harm-DNH-Trainers-Manual-2016.pdf<br />

Vér<strong>on</strong>ique Dudouet (2017). Powering to Peace: Integrated Civil Resistance and<br />

Peacebuilding Strategies. Special Report No. 1. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: Internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

Center <strong>on</strong> N<strong>on</strong>violent C<strong>on</strong>flict. https://www.n<strong>on</strong>violent-c<strong>on</strong>flict.org/wpc<strong>on</strong>tent/uploads/2017/04/powering_to_peace_ver<strong>on</strong>ique_dudouet_icnc_<br />

special_report_series_april2017.pdf<br />

Alan Sharland (2007). The Underlying Philosophies of Mediati<strong>on</strong>. Chapter 2:<br />

Empowerment. https://www.communicati<strong>on</strong>andc<strong>on</strong>flict.com/empowerment.<br />

html<br />


Engaging D<strong>on</strong>ors<br />

8 Engaging D<strong>on</strong>ors<br />

Michael J. Arensen, Beatrix Austin and Andrea Joras<br />

“There is much to be d<strong>on</strong>e.”<br />

Georg Zundel<br />

Ending violent c<strong>on</strong>flicts and building peace require the engagement<br />

and resources of a broad alliance of actors. Building such<br />

alliances, as well as building and sustaining peace together, demands<br />

investment: of dedicati<strong>on</strong>, capacity and skill, of patience<br />

and experience, and of financial resources and joint value-based<br />

advocacy. At the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, we have worked hard over<br />

the years to cultivate a relati<strong>on</strong>ship with our private and public<br />

d<strong>on</strong>ors in which we all are partners in shifting public attenti<strong>on</strong><br />

and discourse towards the societal and political issues necessary<br />

to transform c<strong>on</strong>flicts. We have often succeeded, yet we<br />

still face many challenges. As Stephen Heintz, the President of<br />


Engaging D<strong>on</strong>ors<br />

DONOR | pers<strong>on</strong>s or instituti<strong>on</strong>s giving support – financial as well<br />

as otherwise – to a certain cause or charity. While peacebuilding<br />

relies <strong>on</strong> creativity and dedicati<strong>on</strong> as much as material resources,<br />

engaging d<strong>on</strong>ors in this field is indispensable for peacebuilding<br />

work to be scaled up.<br />

the Rockefeller Brothers Fund notes in its 2017 Annual Review,<br />

“social change does not happen overnight. It does not happen<br />

quickly, and it does not happen as a result of a fixed set of strategies.<br />

Change happens over time; it happens because you are<br />

nimble and flexible, but it also happens because you stick with<br />

your goals while finding new ways to make progress even after<br />

experiencing setbacks”.<br />

Total funding for n<strong>on</strong>-violent c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> is still miniscule<br />

compared to the world’s military budgets. In 2018, SIPRI<br />

estimated world military expenditure at USD 1739 billi<strong>on</strong>, of<br />

which the United States government accounts for by far the largest<br />

share, with a military budget of USD 630 billi<strong>on</strong>. By c<strong>on</strong>trast,<br />

the budget of the United Nati<strong>on</strong>s and all its agencies is about<br />

USD 40 billi<strong>on</strong> per year, according to the Global Policy Forum – a<br />

mere 2.3 per cent of global military expenditure. Similarly, funds<br />

allocated to development assistance by OECD countries in 2016<br />

amounted to USD 142.6 billi<strong>on</strong>, less than 8.2 per cent of global<br />

military spending, <strong>on</strong>ly a small part of which is for peacebuilding.<br />

One estimate puts the global funding for peacebuilding in<br />

2016 at 3.4 billi<strong>on</strong> (ECDPM 2018). These figures remind us that<br />

when it comes to protecting their internati<strong>on</strong>al interests, states<br />

are determined to maintain their ability to use military means<br />

if necessary. Yet while the development of n<strong>on</strong>-violent alternatives<br />

to a military security paradigm may not be at the top of<br />

governments’ list of priorities, there can be no doubt that states<br />

have a role to play in building peace. They are stakeholders in<br />

the majority of c<strong>on</strong>flicts, and they also c<strong>on</strong>trol an overwhelming<br />


Engaging D<strong>on</strong>ors<br />

amount of the resources needed for their resoluti<strong>on</strong>. Sometimes,<br />

they are also gatekeepers to the transformati<strong>on</strong> of c<strong>on</strong>flicts.<br />

However modest the amount of public funding for peacebuilding<br />

may appear, the c<strong>on</strong>trast to private funding is even greater.<br />

The Peace and Security Funding Index compiles data <strong>on</strong> grants<br />

awarded by foundati<strong>on</strong>s for peace and security issues globally.<br />

The latest year for complete data, 2015, identified a total of USD<br />

351 milli<strong>on</strong> for peace and security issues, with roughly USD 188<br />

milli<strong>on</strong> (54 per cent) being spent <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flict preventi<strong>on</strong>, resoluti<strong>on</strong>,<br />

and peacebuilding. That peace-related issues play at best<br />

a minor role in the philanthropic world is no surprise, given the<br />

challenges, which the peace and security envir<strong>on</strong>ment presents.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> stands out as being particularly hard to<br />

approach.<br />

High risk, high reward<br />

With many states and private d<strong>on</strong>ors cutting budgets at a time<br />

of growing global needs, there is an increasing interest in ensuring<br />

the cost-effectiveness and impact of new projects. While<br />

successful violence preventi<strong>on</strong> and c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> are<br />

more cost-effective than humanitarian relief, the impact of c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> is notoriously more difficult to measure, especially<br />

in the short term. C<strong>on</strong>flict situati<strong>on</strong>s are highly complex<br />

and follow a n<strong>on</strong>-linear and l<strong>on</strong>g-term timeframe, as researchers<br />

have pointed out over and over again, not least in several books<br />

co-edited by <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> staff. In additi<strong>on</strong>, the envir<strong>on</strong>ments<br />

where c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> is necessary often face<br />

access and security challenges, which reduce scope for m<strong>on</strong>itoring<br />

and evaluati<strong>on</strong>. Governments are major stakeholders in<br />

most c<strong>on</strong>flicts, and shifting geopolitical dynamics and relati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

bey<strong>on</strong>d the c<strong>on</strong>trol of any organisati<strong>on</strong> can limit the short-term<br />

impact of projects. These dynamics are at odds with most available<br />

project-based funding, which is primarily short-term and<br />

requires measurable steps forward and an attainable outcome<br />

at the end. C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> is, therefore, perceived as a<br />


Engaging D<strong>on</strong>ors<br />

riskier investment, even if it has the potential for much greater<br />

outcomes.<br />

Sec<strong>on</strong>dly, c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, if it aspires to be inclusive, often<br />

involves working with actors who are publicly stigmatised,<br />

such as proscribed groups. This is often highly c<strong>on</strong>troversial in<br />

public and political debate. For organisati<strong>on</strong>s engaged in this<br />

field, there may also be legal c<strong>on</strong>straints <strong>on</strong> engaging with such<br />

actors, especially in the post 9/11 world. Legal uncertainty is not<br />

an attractive envir<strong>on</strong>ment for either n<strong>on</strong>-governmental organisati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

or funders to work in. They have to be prepared to deal with<br />

accusati<strong>on</strong>s and the possibility of negative public relati<strong>on</strong>s fallout,<br />

a risk that private foundati<strong>on</strong>s in particular have tended to<br />

shy away from. However, Rob Reich, Co-Director of the Stanford<br />

Center <strong>on</strong> Philanthropy and Civil Society, argues that providing<br />

“risk capital” is the rais<strong>on</strong> d’être of the philanthropic sector. To<br />

cite Stephen Heintz <strong>on</strong>ce again, “if we aren’t taking risks and assuming<br />

the possibility of failure some of the time, we aren’t doing<br />

our jobs”.<br />

Balancing interests<br />

As seen in global military expenditure figures, states and internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

instituti<strong>on</strong>s have access to massive amounts of resources<br />

relative to private foundati<strong>on</strong>s. In additi<strong>on</strong> to these resources,<br />

states and internati<strong>on</strong>al instituti<strong>on</strong>s have the potential to engage<br />

diplomatically, increasing leverage <strong>on</strong> certain stakeholders<br />

by offering ‘sticks’ or ‘carrots’. In this area, close coordinati<strong>on</strong><br />

with peacebuilding actors (internati<strong>on</strong>al NGOs as well as<br />

local initiatives, which have a thorough understanding of local<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict dynamics) can therefore be of great value. This coordinati<strong>on</strong><br />

is also beneficial to other actors interested in c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> and building peace, including the private sector.<br />

That said, public funding or working closely with states or<br />

internati<strong>on</strong>al bodies can also undermine the efficacy of c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong>. States, in particular, follow a different set of priorities,<br />

which are centred <strong>on</strong> their own interests and standards.<br />


Engaging D<strong>on</strong>ors<br />

Nati<strong>on</strong>al interests, even in more benign forms such as publicity<br />

for support, can pose a direct risk to any project’s potential. In<br />

a very geopolitically competitive landscape, government funding<br />

is often perceived as having sec<strong>on</strong>dary motivati<strong>on</strong>s, such as<br />

increasing political influence or promoting a particular ideology.<br />

Much public funding comes with strings attached – publicity for<br />

the d<strong>on</strong>or country – which can be tricky in c<strong>on</strong>texts requiring a<br />

high degree of c<strong>on</strong>fidentiality and trust building, including “behind<br />

the scenes”. A clear balance needs to be reached between<br />

the greater financial support and potential diplomatic leverage<br />

of government funding, and the risks that potentially come with<br />

being associated with the state.<br />

Private funding<br />

Private funding for c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> can offer enormous<br />

benefits. Again, these benefits are manifold: they offer an increase<br />

in the material resources required for some of the work,<br />

but just as importantly, they establish a circle of like-minded<br />

individuals who serve as ‘ambassadors’ and multipliers. Being<br />

driven by principles that focus <strong>on</strong> stakeholders and their relati<strong>on</strong>ships,<br />

private funders can credibly interact with n<strong>on</strong>-state<br />

actors and civil society in general. These principles may be hard<br />

to rec<strong>on</strong>cile with c<strong>on</strong>flict realities <strong>on</strong> the ground, putting n<strong>on</strong>state<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict stakeholders at a critical disadvantage. Were it not<br />

for privately funded initiatives, these actors would often be left<br />

to themselves or fall under the influence of the str<strong>on</strong>ger c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

party. Finding it easier to reach out and build bridges to a broad<br />

range of actors, privately funded initiatives can help to create<br />

the inclusive peace processes required to tackle today’s ethnopolitical<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flicts, tapping peacebuilding potential which is otherwise<br />

hard to reach. While this means that private funding does<br />

indeed have an important role to play, ultimately the success of<br />

all private initiatives will remain primarily dependent <strong>on</strong> their<br />

ability to leverage scarce resources by reaching out to states or<br />

internati<strong>on</strong>al instituti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />


Engaging D<strong>on</strong>ors<br />

To do so, they have a spectrum of activities at hand, ranging from<br />

the provisi<strong>on</strong> of research, educati<strong>on</strong> and informati<strong>on</strong> to the direct<br />

engagement of people through n<strong>on</strong>-governmental organisati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

and private diplomacy. When these levers are employed adequately<br />

and in a coordinated way, even small-scale initiatives<br />

have the potential to bring about change <strong>on</strong> a large scale. N<strong>on</strong>governmental<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong>s must make sure that their principles<br />

– in the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s case, these are l<strong>on</strong>g-term engagement,<br />

partnership and multipartiality, to name a few – are<br />

in alignment with those of both public and private d<strong>on</strong>ors. The<br />

advantage of private (or philanthropic) resources remains that<br />

these funds can be particularly effective in cases where states<br />

and governments cannot or are not willing to provide support.<br />

Lots to do<br />

There is a clear need for further dialogue between implementers<br />

and d<strong>on</strong>ors <strong>on</strong> how to build <strong>on</strong> their shared interests and needs.<br />

Peacebuilding instituti<strong>on</strong>s need to better understand how available<br />

funding is created, such as through government budgets and<br />

electi<strong>on</strong> cycles, and what drives private philanthropists to invest<br />

in certain areas. Peacebuilders also need to better dem<strong>on</strong>strate<br />

clear results and effective investment. In turn d<strong>on</strong>ors should recognise<br />

the desire by implementers for more flexible, low-profile<br />

and l<strong>on</strong>g-term funding. There are no simple soluti<strong>on</strong>s, but improved<br />

communicati<strong>on</strong> and educati<strong>on</strong> are necessary to ensure<br />

that the needs of d<strong>on</strong>ors, both private and public, and c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> instituti<strong>on</strong>s can be met. More stories about the<br />

successes achieved, often with minimal to modest financial investment<br />

(but with intense pers<strong>on</strong>al and creative engagement by<br />

insider and outsider actors), should be told – by us, our peers<br />

and our d<strong>on</strong>ors. The potential impact that such initiatives can<br />

achieve is enormous. Answering the challenge of violent c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

does not <strong>on</strong>ly relieve human suffering; it can also free up vast<br />

resources that can be put to more beneficial use.<br />


Engaging D<strong>on</strong>ors<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Scilla Elworthy (2017). The Business Plan for Peace. Building a World Without War.<br />

L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong> (self-published).<br />

Hans J. Giessmann and Roger Mac Ginty, with Beatrix Austin and Christine Seifert<br />

(eds.) (2018). The Elgar Compani<strong>on</strong> to Post-C<strong>on</strong>flict Transiti<strong>on</strong>. L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>:<br />

Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.<br />

Daniela Körppen, Norbert Ropers and Hans J. Giessmann (eds.) (2011). The<br />

N<strong>on</strong>-Linearity of Peace Processes – Theory and Practice of Systemic C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Transformati<strong>on</strong>. Opladen/Farmingt<strong>on</strong> Hills: Barbara Budrich Publishers.<br />

Rob Reich (2013). What Are Foundati<strong>on</strong>s For? In: Bost<strong>on</strong> Review, March/April 2013.<br />

SIPRI (2018). SIPRI Yearbook 2018. Armaments, Disarmament and Internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

Security. Summary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br />

SIPRI (2017). SIPRI Yearbook 2017. Armaments, Disarmament and Internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

Security. Summary in German. Berlin/Stockholm: SIPRI, FES and <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Georg Zundel (2006). “Es muss viel geschehen!” Erinnerungen eines friedenspolitisch<br />

engagierten Naturwissenschaftlers. Berlin: Verlag Dr. Michael Engel.<br />

Online Resources<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, Annual Reports, https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/en/<br />

publicati<strong>on</strong>s/annual-reports/<br />

ECDPM, Supporting Peacebuilding in Times of Change report series 2018,<br />

http://ecdpm.org/changingpeacebuilding<br />

Global Policy Forum, www.globalpolicy.org<br />

OECD, www.oecd.org<br />

Peace and Security Funding Index, http://peaceandsecurityindex.org/<br />

Rockefeller Brothers Fund (2018). 2017 Annual Review. Charting Our Progress:<br />

2015-2017. New York. https://www.rbf.org/about/2017-annual-review<br />


Establishing Infrastructures for Peace<br />

9 Establishing Infrastructures<br />

for Peace<br />

Mir Mubashir, Rebecca Davis and Radwa Salah<br />

“Giving peace an address.”<br />

Ulrike Hopp-Nishanka<br />

We are familiar with the term ‘infrastructure’ in relati<strong>on</strong> to the<br />

social, ec<strong>on</strong>omic and technical infrastructure of a country or an<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong>. There, it refers to the underlying foundati<strong>on</strong> and<br />

the basic physical and organisati<strong>on</strong>al framework, structures,<br />

services and facilities such as buildings, transport systems and<br />

power supplies, which an entity needs and uses in order to work<br />

effectively. What infrastructures does peace need? A burge<strong>on</strong>ing<br />

term in the peacebuilding field, infrastructures for peace – i4p<br />

(or peace infrastructures) c<strong>on</strong>stitute a multitude of tangible and<br />


Establishing Infrastructures for Peace<br />

INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PEACE | all things tangible and intangible<br />

that c<strong>on</strong>tribute to sustaining peace through (re)building<br />

c<strong>on</strong>structive social and political relati<strong>on</strong>ships and transforming<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict. Also the resources, structures and mechanisms<br />

for enhancing societal resilience – the ability to recover from<br />

setbacks, overcome trauma and build the resources to adapt<br />

to change and adversity.<br />

intangible elements that c<strong>on</strong>tribute to sustaining peace through<br />

(re)building c<strong>on</strong>structive social and political relati<strong>on</strong>ships and<br />

transforming c<strong>on</strong>flict. i4p also c<strong>on</strong>stitute the resources, structures<br />

and mechanisms for enhancing societal resilience – the<br />

ability to recover from setbacks, overcome trauma and build<br />

the resources to adapt to change and adversity. All these c<strong>on</strong>stituents<br />

are networked and interdependent and are kept alive<br />

through dynamic communicati<strong>on</strong> and interacti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

i4p may c<strong>on</strong>stitute entities and processes at various levels of formality:<br />

formal, n<strong>on</strong>-formal and semi-formal, and may accordingly<br />

encompass nati<strong>on</strong>al, subnati<strong>on</strong>al and local/community<br />

levels. In some cases, they are established top-down, while in<br />

others they evolve more organically bottom-up. They may be<br />

formal nati<strong>on</strong>al instituti<strong>on</strong>s, such as peace ministries, which are<br />

ideally c<strong>on</strong>nected to local mechanisms for dealing with c<strong>on</strong>flict,<br />

such as local peace committees. They may resp<strong>on</strong>d to political<br />

crisis, stimulate fundamental change or address transiti<strong>on</strong>al issues<br />

(e. g. Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue and truth and rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> commissi<strong>on</strong>s).<br />

They may be informal networks at the community<br />

level for early warning/acti<strong>on</strong>. Some i4p evolve as temporary<br />

mechanisms for addressing short-term triggers of violence, e. g.<br />

during electi<strong>on</strong> periods, and then eventually wind up. In many<br />

cases, however, permanent instituti<strong>on</strong>s and mechanism are established<br />

to address l<strong>on</strong>g-term socio-ec<strong>on</strong>omic structural violence<br />

and the socio-cultural discourses that legitimise it. These<br />


Establishing Infrastructures for Peace<br />

C<strong>on</strong>stituents of i4p<br />

Entities and<br />

structures<br />

• Instituti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

• Mechanisms<br />

• Funds<br />

Cultures and<br />

norms<br />

• Rules<br />

• Policies<br />

• Strategies<br />

Peacebuilding actors<br />

and their resources<br />

• Skills<br />

• Capacities<br />

• Values<br />

• Legitimacy<br />

i4p<br />

• (Re)build c<strong>on</strong>structive<br />

social and political<br />

relati<strong>on</strong>ships<br />

• Transform c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

• Enhance societal<br />

re silience<br />

• Sustain peace<br />

Methods and<br />

approaches<br />

• (Sustained) Dialogue<br />

• (Insider) Mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

• (Everyday and Multitrack)<br />

Diplomacy<br />

• Peace Educati<strong>on</strong><br />

Systems and<br />

processes<br />

• Early Warning and<br />

Acti<strong>on</strong><br />

• Crisis Management<br />

• Transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice<br />

• Dealing with the past<br />

• Rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong><br />

Figure 4, source: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>; Mir Mubashir et al.<br />

i4p may need to change and evolve over time to address the c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

dynamics.<br />

A fluid and “networked” model of i4p can ensure horiz<strong>on</strong>tal and<br />

vertical coordinati<strong>on</strong>: formal political settlement efforts by state<br />

actors can be bridged to grassroots peacebuilding efforts of insider<br />

peacebuilders/mediators. Engaging with insider mediators<br />

has been a focus of the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> for many years.<br />


Establishing Infrastructures for Peace<br />

C<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong>s for establishing i4p<br />

There is still a lot to be d<strong>on</strong>e to exhaustively map, identify and<br />

understand existing i4p. While it has been popular since the<br />

mid-1990s to speak of local capacities and approaches, much<br />

more could be d<strong>on</strong>e to share experience and improve collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />

to strengthen this local expertise. Some points to keep in<br />

mind, based <strong>on</strong> less<strong>on</strong>s learned in the practice of establishing<br />

i4p:<br />

Letting i4p organically evolve and become sustainable<br />

i4p need to evolve organically, according to the needs of the specific<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict c<strong>on</strong>text; they cannot be prescribed or result from internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

pressure. Internati<strong>on</strong>al actors must avoid a “<strong>on</strong>e size<br />

fits all” approach of transporting blueprints between c<strong>on</strong>texts.<br />

They should instead be willing to learn from the local cultural,<br />

ethnic and religious c<strong>on</strong>texts and help to shape the evoluti<strong>on</strong><br />

of i4p, if asked to do so. They must be seen as legitimate and<br />

trustworthy by all c<strong>on</strong>flict stakeholders. This may even open up<br />

opportunities for insider funding of i4p, perhaps with local and<br />

nati<strong>on</strong>al entrepreneurs earmarking financial resources to support<br />

them. If i4p are primarily created with internati<strong>on</strong>al d<strong>on</strong>ors’<br />

project funding, it is important to ensure that they are able to<br />

c<strong>on</strong>tinue functi<strong>on</strong>ing when the funding runs out.<br />

Managing inclusivity<br />

Being inclusive and participatory is a challenging endeavour<br />

in governance and peacebuilding with regard to scope, quality<br />

and ‘will’ (→ Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>). While at the local/<br />

community level – such as local peace committees or community<br />

policing mechanisms – scope and quality may be manageable,<br />

in many c<strong>on</strong>texts inclusivity is a challenge. Especially in<br />

traditi<strong>on</strong>al, patriarchal and ger<strong>on</strong>tocratic societies i4p tend to be<br />

exclusi<strong>on</strong>ary of women, young people and marginalised groups.<br />

Managing scope and quality is more challenging for i4p at the<br />

subnati<strong>on</strong>al and nati<strong>on</strong>al level. Incremental and iterative inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />

mechanisms (as in peace processes and Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogues)<br />

may prove beneficial in this regard. It is important to energise the<br />


Establishing Infrastructures for Peace<br />

“networking engine” of i4p. This “engine” is made up of entities<br />

and individuals, especially insider mediators, who can keep the<br />

communicati<strong>on</strong> alive between various i4p c<strong>on</strong>stituents, and also<br />

deal with “spoilers” who attempt to render i4p ineffective and<br />

disrupt communicati<strong>on</strong> flows.<br />

Keeping networking and communicati<strong>on</strong> alive<br />

Managing local-subnati<strong>on</strong>al-nati<strong>on</strong>al-internati<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

and coordinati<strong>on</strong> is easier said than d<strong>on</strong>e. In particular, the crucial<br />

subnati<strong>on</strong>al links between the local and nati<strong>on</strong>al layers of<br />

i4p are often neglected or under-resourced. Insider mediators<br />

usually play a key role in keeping an overview of the linkages<br />

(and the lack thereof), and raise awareness and mobilise resources<br />

accordingly. The state sometimes plays a coordinating<br />

role, albeit to a limited degree.<br />

Handling exploitati<strong>on</strong><br />

The permanence of certain i4p as state instituti<strong>on</strong>s may make<br />

them vulnerable to corrupti<strong>on</strong> and abuse by political parties.<br />

Internati<strong>on</strong>al actors may also exploit certain i4p for their own<br />

agendas. All i4p c<strong>on</strong>stituents should c<strong>on</strong>tain an accountability<br />

and integrity mechanism, which can re-evaluate their mandate,<br />

and staffing, and dissolve the instituti<strong>on</strong> if need be.<br />

Rethinking dependency<br />

i4p should not entirely depend <strong>on</strong> the support and political will<br />

of state or internati<strong>on</strong>al actors. As menti<strong>on</strong>ed above, they should<br />

be seen as embedded in the ‘everyday’ noti<strong>on</strong>s of peace in the<br />

different layers of social and political life. i4p are, however, more<br />

effective if there is a political commitment from the state and<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict parties to c<strong>on</strong>tribute to their functi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />


Establishing Infrastructures for Peace<br />

Background knowledge …<br />

First of its kind in the development of the i4p c<strong>on</strong>cept<br />

One of the first instances of i4p emerged in South Africa: a<br />

Nati<strong>on</strong>al Peace Secretariat, and Peace Committees at several<br />

levels – local, regi<strong>on</strong>al and nati<strong>on</strong>al – were established to supervise<br />

the implementati<strong>on</strong> of the 1991 Peace Accord. Building<br />

<strong>on</strong> joint and inclusive ownership, these instituti<strong>on</strong>s were<br />

part of a comprehensive framework for peacebuilding. The<br />

Peace Committees, for example, are thought to have helped<br />

to determine South Africa’s political future by bringing apartheid<br />

to a halt in 1994. The South African i4p were successful<br />

in c<strong>on</strong>taining violence and preparing the ground for peaceful<br />

electi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

A top-down i4p<br />

To ensure the implementati<strong>on</strong> of the Comprehensive Peace<br />

Agreement of 2006 and to coordinate nati<strong>on</strong>al peace efforts,<br />

Nepal established the Ministry of Peace and Rec<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong>.<br />

The ministry linked government instituti<strong>on</strong>s with local peace<br />

councils and mediati<strong>on</strong> centres. The Nepalese i4p’s service<br />

functi<strong>on</strong>s included negotiati<strong>on</strong> support, advice to political<br />

parties, and access to justice through community mediati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

A bottom-up i4p<br />

Local initiatives to address resource and political c<strong>on</strong>flict in<br />

Wajir County in Northern Kenya in the early 1990s were such a<br />

great source of inspirati<strong>on</strong> that they became instituti<strong>on</strong>alised<br />

in nati<strong>on</strong>al policy. The Nati<strong>on</strong>al Steering Committee <strong>on</strong> Peacebuilding<br />

and C<strong>on</strong>flict Management now coordinates the work<br />

of peacebuilders and instituti<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> a nati<strong>on</strong>al scale.<br />

An instituti<strong>on</strong>alised i4p<br />

The Nati<strong>on</strong>al Peace Council of Ghana instituti<strong>on</strong>alised the efforts<br />

of networks of insider mediators to prevent and address<br />


Establishing Infrastructures for Peace<br />

electi<strong>on</strong>-related violence in particular. The state created a Peacebuilding<br />

Support Unit to coordinate with other government agencies,<br />

and also appointed Peace Promoti<strong>on</strong> Officers at subnati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

levels.<br />

The power of multi-layered regi<strong>on</strong>al i4p<br />

Early warning and resp<strong>on</strong>se systems used by the African regi<strong>on</strong>al<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong>s ECOWAS and IGAD rely <strong>on</strong> networks of local m<strong>on</strong>itors<br />

who also act as first resp<strong>on</strong>se teams, exploring and mediating<br />

local tensi<strong>on</strong>s while also alerting and involving governmental<br />

and regi<strong>on</strong>al actors.<br />

i4p resp<strong>on</strong>ding to crisis and transiti<strong>on</strong><br />

Tunisia’s Quartet (a coaliti<strong>on</strong> of n<strong>on</strong>-state actors led by the General<br />

Labour Uni<strong>on</strong>, UGTT) played a crucial role in creating a political<br />

space for dialogue and cooperati<strong>on</strong>, mediating tensi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

and ensuring the political transiti<strong>on</strong> after the ‘Arab Spring’. The<br />

Quartet was not a governmental body, but as the members were<br />

influential and c<strong>on</strong>sidered credible actors across c<strong>on</strong>stituencies,<br />

it proved to be a critical comp<strong>on</strong>ent of the Tunisian nati<strong>on</strong>al infrastructures<br />

for peace.<br />

i4p mechanisms for dealing with the past<br />

Truth and rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> commissi<strong>on</strong>s are an important comp<strong>on</strong>ent<br />

of transiti<strong>on</strong>al justice. The commissi<strong>on</strong>s enable society to<br />

understand and reflect <strong>on</strong> the painful past and to build a new<br />

nati<strong>on</strong>al identity. Truth commissi<strong>on</strong>s in El Salvador proved essential<br />

in instigating a review of the legal system and improving<br />

the protecti<strong>on</strong> of human rights in the country.<br />


Establishing Infrastructures for Peace<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Tobi P. Dress (2005). “Designing a Peacebuilding Infrastructure: Taking a Systems<br />

Approach to the Preventi<strong>on</strong> of Deadly C<strong>on</strong>flict.” Development Dossier – United<br />

Nati<strong>on</strong>s. The United Nati<strong>on</strong>s N<strong>on</strong>-Governmental Liais<strong>on</strong> Service (NGLS).<br />

ECDPM and EU (2012). “Strengthening Nati<strong>on</strong>al Capacities for Mediati<strong>on</strong> and<br />

Dialogue: Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue Platforms and Infrastructures for Peace.”<br />

Factsheet – EEAS Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support Project – Knowledge Product. Brussels:<br />

European Centre for Development Policy Management. European External<br />

Acti<strong>on</strong> Service.<br />

Hans-Joachim Giessmann (2016). “Embedded Peace. Infrastructures for Peace:<br />

Approaches and Less<strong>on</strong>s Learned.” UNDP.<br />

John Paul Lederach (2012). “The Origins and Evoluti<strong>on</strong> of Infrastructures for Peace:<br />

A Pers<strong>on</strong>al Reflecti<strong>on</strong>.” Journal of Peacebuilding & Development 7 (3), 8–13.<br />

Jordan Ryan (2012). “Infrastructures for Peace as a Path to Resilient Societies:<br />

An Instituti<strong>on</strong>al Perspective.” Journal of Peacebuilding & Development 7 (3),<br />

14–24.<br />

Barbara Unger, Stina Lundström, Katrin Planta and Beatrix Austin (eds.) (2013).<br />

Peace Infrastructures: Assessing C<strong>on</strong>cept and Practice. <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook<br />

Dialogue Series 10. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Online Resources<br />

Peace Portal, Infrastructures for Peace, https://www.peaceportal.org/web/i4p<br />

Special Issue: Journal of Peacebuilding and Development,<br />

https://www.tandf<strong>on</strong>line.com/toc/rjpd20/7/3<br />

Feature: Insider Mediators, <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/featured-topics/insider-mediators/<br />


Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong> and Dialogue<br />

10 Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong><br />

and Dialogue<br />

Theresa Breitmaier and Frans Schram<br />

“Nobody is as wise as we all together.”<br />

African proverb<br />

When working to overcome differences <strong>on</strong> a political and societal<br />

level in order to transform violent c<strong>on</strong>flicts, the facilitati<strong>on</strong> of<br />

dialogues and negotiati<strong>on</strong>s is a key tool for peacebuilders. Over<br />

time, the applicati<strong>on</strong>s of facilitati<strong>on</strong> as a peacebuilding tool have<br />

diversified. Facilitated processes are now implemented with a<br />

broad range of participants such as decisi<strong>on</strong>-makers in their private<br />

capacity (informal track 1 processes), influential individuals<br />

and analysts from civil society (track 2 processes), or mixtures of<br />

civil society and decisi<strong>on</strong>-makers (track 1.5 processes).<br />


Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong> and Dialogue<br />

FACILITATION | the assistance of an accepted “third party” to ease<br />

the management of communicati<strong>on</strong> and process of dialogue, negotiati<strong>on</strong><br />

or other encounters. Facilitati<strong>on</strong> happens before, during<br />

and after meetings.<br />

DIALOGUE | a face-to-face interacti<strong>on</strong> between people with different<br />

backgrounds, c<strong>on</strong>victi<strong>on</strong>s and opini<strong>on</strong>s, in which they respect<br />

each other as human beings and are prepared to listen to<br />

– and learn from – each other deeply enough to inspire a change<br />

of attitudes.<br />

NEGOTIATION | back-and-forth communicati<strong>on</strong> designed to reach<br />

an agreement in a situati<strong>on</strong> where parties <strong>on</strong> different sides of<br />

the situati<strong>on</strong> in questi<strong>on</strong> have a number of interests in comm<strong>on</strong><br />

and others that are c<strong>on</strong>flicting.<br />

All three are central to peacemaking as well as peacebuilding and<br />

play a role in all peace processes.<br />

The different terms used to describe the communicative aspects<br />

of third-party (or occasi<strong>on</strong>ally insider-peacebuilder) involvement<br />

in a peace process have significant c<strong>on</strong>ceptual and practical<br />

overlaps.<br />

Facilitating transformative dialogue<br />

Dialogue methods and benefits<br />

Dialogue, face-to-face interacti<strong>on</strong> between people with different<br />

backgrounds, c<strong>on</strong>victi<strong>on</strong>s and opini<strong>on</strong>s, in which they respect<br />

each other as human beings and are prepared to listen to each<br />

other deeply enough to inspire change of attitudes or learning,<br />

is <strong>on</strong>e central means – if not the classical <strong>on</strong>e – of dealing with<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flicts in a c<strong>on</strong>structive way. As the saying goes, ‘as l<strong>on</strong>g as<br />

you’re talking, you can’t be shooting’. What better method is<br />

there of resolving a dispute – according to another comm<strong>on</strong>-<br />


Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong> and Dialogue<br />

On terminology …<br />

Facilitati<strong>on</strong> is characterised by the presence of an accepted<br />

“third party”, who assists the negotiating (or c<strong>on</strong>flict) parties in<br />

managing key elements of the communicati<strong>on</strong> and/or negotiati<strong>on</strong><br />

process. While mediati<strong>on</strong> (→ Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support),<br />

a semi-directive type of facilitati<strong>on</strong>, emphasises the need<br />

to reach a mutually accepted agreement, many facilitators focus<br />

more <strong>on</strong> improving the relati<strong>on</strong>ship and general communicati<strong>on</strong><br />

between the parties. Facilitators and mediators both help the<br />

group to communicate more effectively and improve their mutual<br />

understanding. Their resp<strong>on</strong>sibilities relate to the process rather<br />

than the c<strong>on</strong>tent but facilitators can also act to some extent as<br />

creative c<strong>on</strong>tent providers for enriching the discussi<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Dialogue, as Norbert Ropers defines it in “Basics of Dialogue Facilitati<strong>on</strong>”,<br />

is the meaningful and meaning-creating exchange of<br />

percepti<strong>on</strong>s and opini<strong>on</strong>s and is <strong>on</strong>e of the methods people most<br />

frequently turn to when addressing c<strong>on</strong>flictive issues peacefully.<br />

Negotiati<strong>on</strong> can be broadly defined as a communicati<strong>on</strong> process<br />

between two or more actors, who are mutually interdependent,<br />

for the ostensible purpose of reaching an agreement <strong>on</strong> a situati<strong>on</strong><br />

perceived as a problem or c<strong>on</strong>flict. In many ways, negotiati<strong>on</strong><br />

is a basic means of getting what you want from others. It is<br />

back-and-forth communicati<strong>on</strong> designed to reach an agreement<br />

in a situati<strong>on</strong> where parties <strong>on</strong> different sides of the situati<strong>on</strong> in<br />

questi<strong>on</strong> have a number of interests in comm<strong>on</strong> and others that<br />

are c<strong>on</strong>flicting.<br />

sense observati<strong>on</strong> – than through an h<strong>on</strong>est exchange of views?<br />

In c<strong>on</strong>trast to the terms “discussi<strong>on</strong>” and “debate”, which focus<br />

primarily <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>tent of a c<strong>on</strong>versati<strong>on</strong>, the word “dialogue”<br />

places equal emphasis <strong>on</strong> the relati<strong>on</strong>ship between the pers<strong>on</strong>s<br />


Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong> and Dialogue<br />

involved and avoids the usual element of “competiti<strong>on</strong>” as much<br />

as possible. The central goal is to try to create a different kind of<br />

communicati<strong>on</strong> and a deeper understanding of <strong>on</strong>e’s own needs<br />

and interests as well as those of the other side. This paves the<br />

way to exploring better ways of preventing, managing, resolving<br />

or even transforming c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

Some of the elements widely regarded as hallmarks of c<strong>on</strong>structive<br />

dialogue are:<br />

dem<strong>on</strong>strating respect for and acknowledging the equality<br />

of all dialogue participants with their unique background and<br />

opini<strong>on</strong>s;<br />

developing active listening skills and empathy for the c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

from all dialogue partners;<br />

suspending <strong>on</strong>e’s own assumpti<strong>on</strong>s, ideas, emoti<strong>on</strong>s, and<br />

opini<strong>on</strong>s for some time to allow new impulses to emerge;<br />

speaking from the heart and expressing <strong>on</strong>e’s own truth in a<br />

genuine manner, emphasising the process, which has influenced<br />

<strong>on</strong>e’s own positi<strong>on</strong>, rather than the result;<br />

slowing down the process of communicati<strong>on</strong> and interacti<strong>on</strong>,<br />

opening up to new insights, and exploring opportunities for joint<br />

learning.<br />

While dialogues are important to help transform relati<strong>on</strong>ships,<br />

promote empathy, and inspire problem-solving, they are, of<br />

course, no substitute for efforts to address structural causes and<br />

engage with the power-political aspects of the c<strong>on</strong>flict. The ideal<br />

requirements will rarely be achieved in the c<strong>on</strong>text of highly escalated<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flicts. There, the affected pers<strong>on</strong>s may be reluctant<br />

even to meet each other face-to-face, for example, when the political<br />

escalati<strong>on</strong> has created “moral”, legal, and/or physical barriers<br />

to encounters with the “enemy”. The main challenges, however,<br />

are rooted much more deeply, in the participants’ c<strong>on</strong>cepts<br />

of identity and their percepti<strong>on</strong>s, fears (for example of losing<br />

face or being seen as weak), and feelings about each other. One<br />

fundamental requirement for any promising dialogue is therefore<br />

the creati<strong>on</strong> of “safe spaces” for these meetings.<br />


Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong> and Dialogue<br />

Some dialogues are <strong>on</strong>e-off events, but most peace professi<strong>on</strong>als<br />

are c<strong>on</strong>vinced that it is necessary to envisi<strong>on</strong> effective dialogues<br />

as l<strong>on</strong>g-term processes with a relatively c<strong>on</strong>tinuous group of participants.<br />

A broad spectrum of dialogue methods and tools has been developed<br />

to promote social change and to develop creative modes of<br />

participatory learning. Some of the approaches at the disposal of<br />

a facilitator are:<br />

inspiring participants to engage with each other in a variety<br />

of settings (e. g. using open-space techniques or the World Café<br />

approach);<br />

encouraging participants to speak about their c<strong>on</strong>flict-related<br />

experiences, grievances, and expectati<strong>on</strong>s in a manner which<br />

enables more c<strong>on</strong>structive interacti<strong>on</strong> (e. g. through story-telling<br />

or biographical work, an approach explored and h<strong>on</strong>ed by the<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, for example in the South Caucasus);<br />

making use of creative methods to promote empathy and a<br />

change of perspectives (e. g. theatre work, change laboratories,<br />

or role reversals);<br />

generating alternative visi<strong>on</strong>s of the future (scenario-building,<br />

future workshops, and the like, another area that the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong> is investigating both in its research and in its<br />

practical engagement).<br />

Criticism of dialogue projects<br />

Criticism of dialogue projects in the peacebuilding and c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> field has focused mainly <strong>on</strong> the strategic deficits<br />

of dialogues and the difficulties in assessing their impact. Many<br />

dialogue initiatives seem to be based <strong>on</strong> the simple assumpti<strong>on</strong><br />

that just bringing together representatives of c<strong>on</strong>flicting parties<br />

will do some good and cannot do harm. This assumpti<strong>on</strong> can no<br />

l<strong>on</strong>ger be justified in light of various cases in which participants<br />

were attacked by hardliners from their c<strong>on</strong>stituency because<br />

of their encounters with the “enemy”. At the same time, there<br />

is no doubt that many dialogue projects at the grassroots and<br />

middle levels have c<strong>on</strong>tributed significantly to creating islands<br />


Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong> and Dialogue<br />

and cultures of peace – even if these efforts often fail to translate<br />

into a macro-political impact (→ Establishing Infrastructures for<br />

Peace).<br />

Another criticism is that dialogues can be harmful in highly<br />

asymmetric c<strong>on</strong>flicts if they c<strong>on</strong>ceal the inherent inequalities <strong>on</strong><br />

the ground by creating the formal impressi<strong>on</strong> of a “symmetrical<br />

dialogue”. While the more powerful representatives then may<br />

glorify their openness to dialogue <strong>on</strong> “difficult” issues, representatives<br />

of the less powerful party often perceive these encounters<br />

as a waste of time, a fig leaf or, even worse, as reinforcing the<br />

unequal status quo.<br />

In the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s experience, as with all other tools of<br />

peacebuilding and c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> it is crucial to c<strong>on</strong>ceptualise<br />

dialogue work within a strategic c<strong>on</strong>text and an explicit<br />

theory of change and to be prepared for a l<strong>on</strong>g-term process with<br />

parallel efforts to address the structural drivers of c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

Facilitating negotiati<strong>on</strong> as a tool for peace support work<br />

Transformati<strong>on</strong> models build <strong>on</strong> the assumpti<strong>on</strong> that a c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

develops from its latent phase towards a manifest phase. This is<br />

because c<strong>on</strong>flict parties evolve and mature over time: a “party to<br />

the c<strong>on</strong>flict” develops, at a later stage when the situati<strong>on</strong> is ‘ripe’,<br />

into a “party to the negotiati<strong>on</strong>s”. In other words, (meaningful)<br />

negotiati<strong>on</strong> and mediati<strong>on</strong> can <strong>on</strong>ly take place and succeed<br />

when the parties acknowledge that there is indeed a c<strong>on</strong>flict and<br />

when they accept the other party’s relevance in achieving some<br />

form of (re)soluti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Due to its open-ended character and flexible selecti<strong>on</strong> of participants,<br />

facilitati<strong>on</strong> can be a good tool in creating spaces for<br />

encounters, exchange, and (possibly, preparatory) dialogue in<br />

situati<strong>on</strong>s where negotiati<strong>on</strong> is impossible, either because parties<br />

do not accept its necessity or because official negotiati<strong>on</strong><br />

formats exist but the process is not dynamic and shows signs of<br />


Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong> and Dialogue<br />

a stalemate. (See also → Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support and<br />

→ Breaking Deadlocks.)<br />

Outside of working with two or more warring parties, facilitati<strong>on</strong><br />

can also be directed towards social and political reform <strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong>e<br />

side <strong>on</strong>ly. The facilitated process empowers participants to advocate<br />

reforms that are also influenced by the views, hopes, and<br />

problems of the “other side” (→ Empowerment and Ownership).<br />

Mutual understanding, respect and recogniti<strong>on</strong> create the framework<br />

for people to define their own issues.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Roger Fisher and William Ury (2011). Getting to Yes: Negotiating an Agreement<br />

without Giving In. Updated and revised editi<strong>on</strong>. New York: Penguin Books.<br />

Marianne Mille Bojer, Heiko Roehl, Marianne Knuth and Colleen Magner (2008).<br />

Mapping Dialogue: Essential Tools for Social Change. Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos<br />

Institute Publicati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

Oliver Ramsbotham (2016). When C<strong>on</strong>flict Resoluti<strong>on</strong> Fails: An Alternative to Negotiati<strong>on</strong><br />

and Dialogue: Engaging Radical Disagreement in Intractable C<strong>on</strong>flicts.<br />

L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: Polity.<br />

Online Resources<br />

Norbert Ropers (2017). Basics of Dialogue Facilitati<strong>on</strong>. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/<br />

Other_Resources/Ropers_BasicsofDialogueFacilitati<strong>on</strong>.pdf [also in Spanish<br />

and Arabic]<br />

Marike Blunck et al. (2017). Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue Handbook: A Guide for<br />

Practiti<strong>on</strong>ers. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>. https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Other_Resources/Nati<strong>on</strong>alDialogue/<br />

BF-Nati<strong>on</strong>alDialogue-Handbook.pdf [also in Spanish, French and Arabic]<br />

Andrea Zemskov-Züge and Oliver Wolleh (eds.) (2018). “Changing the Past in<br />

our Heads”: A Facilitator’s Guide to Listening Workshops. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong>. https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/<br />

Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Papers/20180111Caucasus_manual.pdf<br />


Fostering Human Security<br />

11 Fostering Human Security<br />

Hans J. Giessmann, Andreas Schädel and Basir Feda<br />

“Peace, to have meaning for many who have known <strong>on</strong>ly suffering<br />

in both peace and war, must be translated into bread or rice,<br />

shelter, health, and educati<strong>on</strong>, as well as freedom and human<br />

dignity – a steadily better life.”<br />

Ralph J. Bunche<br />

Security, in the literal sense of the word, means a state free from<br />

care (lat. se cura). Since the first nati<strong>on</strong>-states emerged in the<br />

mid-16th century up until the end of World War II, security was<br />

comm<strong>on</strong>ly understood as the primary c<strong>on</strong>cern of states to maintain<br />

external sovereignty and to avert any threats from the outside,<br />

particularly military threats from other states. This understanding<br />

has changed fundamentally in recent decades.<br />


Fostering Human Security<br />

HUMAN SECURITY | a comprehensive, people-centred and preventi<strong>on</strong>-oriented<br />

c<strong>on</strong>cept that includes protecti<strong>on</strong> from threats<br />

in the area of ec<strong>on</strong>omic, food, health, envir<strong>on</strong>mental, pers<strong>on</strong>al,<br />

community and political security.<br />

The erosi<strong>on</strong> of the traditi<strong>on</strong>al understanding of security<br />

There are countless examples throughout history where seeking<br />

“security” has served to justify wars and raids, c<strong>on</strong>quering<br />

col<strong>on</strong>ies and oppressing peoples. Security policy was a zero-sum<br />

game played according to the law of the str<strong>on</strong>gest, with security<br />

of the powerful being based <strong>on</strong> the insecurity of the less powerful.<br />

This narrow understanding of security – sovereignty and<br />

protecti<strong>on</strong> of states – was called into questi<strong>on</strong> when humankind<br />

entered the nuclear age.<br />

Since any use of nuclear weap<strong>on</strong>s harbours the risk of unc<strong>on</strong>trollable<br />

devastati<strong>on</strong>, it was the interdependence of security, between<br />

the “haves” and the “have-nots”, which became a political<br />

issue. A deep understanding of this new dimensi<strong>on</strong> of threat,<br />

and of the resp<strong>on</strong>sibility of social and natural scientists to work<br />

together to find ways of better dealing with c<strong>on</strong>flict than weap<strong>on</strong>ised<br />

security, was an important impulse for the founding of the<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> for C<strong>on</strong>flict Studies in the 1970s.<br />

Growing awareness of nuclear interdependence has also helped<br />

to carve out a growing c<strong>on</strong>sciousness that security is no l<strong>on</strong>ger<br />

just a military issue or privilege <strong>on</strong>ly of states. Rather, structural<br />

interdependences may also exist because of other – n<strong>on</strong>military<br />

– risks or threats to physical existence and between<br />

unequally powerful social actors in c<strong>on</strong>flict, such as between<br />

dysfuncti<strong>on</strong>al governments and an organised oppositi<strong>on</strong> in fragile<br />

states. Structural interdependence and power asymmetries<br />

may thus become a str<strong>on</strong>g driver of interests in → C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />


Fostering Human Security<br />

A broader c<strong>on</strong>cept of security<br />

In the 1970s and 1980s, an originally small-scale expert debate<br />

reached public attenti<strong>on</strong> when it c<strong>on</strong>sidered n<strong>on</strong>-military “global<br />

risks” such as climate change, resource scarcity, under-development<br />

and modern epidemics to be triggers for armed c<strong>on</strong>flict,<br />

posing a threat to the security of states and peoples that is almost<br />

equal to war. The hitherto undisputed traditi<strong>on</strong>al security focus<br />

<strong>on</strong> military threats became c<strong>on</strong>tested. As the Report of the World<br />

Commissi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> Envir<strong>on</strong>ment and Development (Brundtland Report)<br />

stated in 1987:<br />

88<br />

“C<strong>on</strong>flicts may arise not <strong>on</strong>ly because of political and<br />

military threats to nati<strong>on</strong>al sovereignty; they may derive<br />

also from envir<strong>on</strong>mental degradati<strong>on</strong> and the pre-empti<strong>on</strong><br />

of development opti<strong>on</strong>s. … Acti<strong>on</strong> to reduce envir<strong>on</strong>mental<br />

threats to security requires a redefiniti<strong>on</strong> of priorities,<br />

nati<strong>on</strong>ally and globally. Such a redefiniti<strong>on</strong> could evolve<br />

through the widespread acceptance of broader forms<br />

of security assessment and embrace military, political,<br />

envir<strong>on</strong>mental, and other sources of c<strong>on</strong>flict.”<br />

A security policy that cares about n<strong>on</strong>-military risks and threats<br />

needs different tools and approaches than military defence.<br />

Moreover, risks which have a global scope by nature can hardly<br />

be mitigated, let al<strong>on</strong>e resolved, by nati<strong>on</strong>-state-based policies.<br />

Internati<strong>on</strong>al, and in most cases transnati<strong>on</strong>al, collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />

is required. Yet the political dominance of traditi<strong>on</strong>al security<br />

thinking has remained an obstacle to the c<strong>on</strong>structive enlargement<br />

of security perspectives. Negotiati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> global risks such<br />

as climate change, water scarcity and threats to biodiversity<br />

dem<strong>on</strong>strate both a growing sense of the need for global cooperati<strong>on</strong><br />

and the difficulty of nati<strong>on</strong>-states in reaching compromise<br />

over competing interests.<br />

In their effort to maintain the upper hand, the more powerful<br />

states in particular tend to “securitise” their policies, i. e. to defend<br />

their own interests rather than to seek fair arrangements, as

Fostering Human Security<br />

the current migrati<strong>on</strong> regime of the European Uni<strong>on</strong> illustrates.<br />

The issue area of preventing violent extremism shows similar<br />

ill effects of “securitisati<strong>on</strong>”, as <strong>on</strong>e of our most recent <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Handbook Dialogues made clear. Pursuing security policy at the<br />

cost of others, however, will so<strong>on</strong>er or later turn interdependence<br />

into more insecurity for all.<br />

From enlarged security to human security<br />

The worldwide cascade of radical political and societal changes<br />

after the end of the Cold War influenced the manner in which security<br />

c<strong>on</strong>cepts were viewed across the globe. The political and<br />

social changes, in combinati<strong>on</strong> with the impact of global risks,<br />

affected every<strong>on</strong>e’s lives. Against this background, the 1994 Annual<br />

Report of the United Nati<strong>on</strong>s Development Programme<br />

coined the term “human security”, defined as the freedom from<br />

fear (i. e. protecti<strong>on</strong> from violence) and the freedom from want<br />

(i. e. a more holistic approach to security that includes protecti<strong>on</strong><br />

from hunger, diseases and natural disasters) for each individual.<br />

Human security was designed as a comprehensive, people-centred<br />

and preventi<strong>on</strong>-oriented c<strong>on</strong>cept that includes protecti<strong>on</strong><br />

from threats in the area of ec<strong>on</strong>omic, food, health, envir<strong>on</strong>mental,<br />

pers<strong>on</strong>al, community and political security. The revoluti<strong>on</strong>ary<br />

aspect was not <strong>on</strong>ly that it rec<strong>on</strong>figured the traditi<strong>on</strong>al security<br />

paradigm and advocated a holistic c<strong>on</strong>cept that combined<br />

security and development policy as mutually reinforcing; it also<br />

linked the idea of human security to the resp<strong>on</strong>sibility of states<br />

to provide the necessary c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

Japan and Canada were am<strong>on</strong>g the first states to adopt the c<strong>on</strong>cept<br />

of human security in their nati<strong>on</strong>al policies. Canada focused<br />

mainly <strong>on</strong> protecti<strong>on</strong> from a variety of threats, whereas<br />

Japan adopted a mix reflected in the UN debates, with a str<strong>on</strong>ger<br />

focus <strong>on</strong> educati<strong>on</strong>, health and the envir<strong>on</strong>ment to “change lifestyles”<br />

in order to fulfil every human’s potential.<br />


Fostering Human Security<br />

Security C<strong>on</strong>cepts<br />

Traditi<strong>on</strong>al Security<br />

Purpose<br />

Protecti<strong>on</strong> of states against<br />

military threats from other states<br />

Level of Actors<br />

States<br />

Instruments<br />

and Approaches<br />

Defence policy; alliances of states;<br />

codificati<strong>on</strong> and enforcement<br />

of internati<strong>on</strong>al and humanitarian law<br />

Table 2, source: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

For the first time, the sovereignty of states to act domestically<br />

as they see fit was challenged in cases where governments flagrantly<br />

disregarded universal human rights and freedoms. The<br />

c<strong>on</strong>cept of the “resp<strong>on</strong>sibility to protect” was developed by the<br />

Internati<strong>on</strong>al Commissi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> Interventi<strong>on</strong> and State Sovereignty<br />

in 2001 and it pushed the issue further, by stating that governments<br />

should not be allowed to threaten their own citizens and if<br />

found to be doing so should be duly sancti<strong>on</strong>ed with a mandate<br />

from the internati<strong>on</strong>al community.<br />

Of course, the legitimacy and the accountability of states to act<br />

under the auspices of resp<strong>on</strong>sibility to protect remain a matter of<br />

c<strong>on</strong>cern, due to the possible inclinati<strong>on</strong> of major powers to in-<br />


Fostering Human Security<br />

Comprehensive Security<br />

Protecti<strong>on</strong> of states<br />

and their societies against<br />

military and n<strong>on</strong>-military<br />

(n<strong>on</strong>-traditi<strong>on</strong>al) threats<br />

and risks<br />

States<br />

Collaborative and integrative<br />

strategies for all policy<br />

areas, including military<br />

and civilian elements;<br />

securitisati<strong>on</strong> of policies<br />

Human Security<br />

Protecti<strong>on</strong> of all human<br />

beings from being threatened,<br />

regardless of the origin of<br />

threats (freedom from fear and<br />

freedom from want)<br />

States, n<strong>on</strong>-governmental<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong>s, social groups,<br />

individuals<br />

Dominance of civilian strategies<br />

to provide living c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s in<br />

peace, dignity, prosperity for<br />

every<strong>on</strong>e<br />

tervene for selfish reas<strong>on</strong>s under the banner of “resp<strong>on</strong>sibility”.<br />

But the new interpretati<strong>on</strong> of human security and the protecti<strong>on</strong><br />

of populati<strong>on</strong>s against arbitrary state behaviour are important<br />

positive reference points for c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

If states are held accountable for guaranteeing human security<br />

– and since sustainable development and just peace are<br />

intrinsic prerequisites for human security, and vice versa – the<br />

chances increase of making social and political relati<strong>on</strong>ship patterns<br />

more peaceful. The c<strong>on</strong>cept of human security addresses<br />

the underlying causes of violent c<strong>on</strong>flict, which are of primary<br />

c<strong>on</strong>cern for c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, and directs attenti<strong>on</strong> to the<br />

sustained preventi<strong>on</strong> of violence. C<strong>on</strong>versely, c<strong>on</strong>flict transfor-<br />


Fostering Human Security<br />

mati<strong>on</strong> is a promising approach to support the goal of human<br />

security because it aims to transform the security sector and others<br />

and to change patterns of security behaviour, c<strong>on</strong>tributing to<br />

turning structural and inter-pers<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>flicts into c<strong>on</strong>structive<br />

relati<strong>on</strong>ships.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

David Andersen-Rodgers and Kerry Crawford (2018). Human Security: Theory and<br />

Acti<strong>on</strong>. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.<br />

Mohammed Abu-Nimer (2018). Islamizati<strong>on</strong>, Securitizati<strong>on</strong>, and Peacebuilding<br />

Resp<strong>on</strong>ses to Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism, in: Lisa Schirch<br />

(ed.) The Ecology of Violent Extremism: Perspectives <strong>on</strong> Human Security and<br />

Peacebuilding. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 218–225.<br />

David Bosold and Sascha Werthes (2005). Human Security in Practice: Canadian<br />

and Japanese Experiences, in: Internati<strong>on</strong>al Politics and Society [Internati<strong>on</strong>ale<br />

Politik und Gesellschaft], 1/2005, 84–101.<br />

Barry Buzan et al. (1997). Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder: Lynne<br />

Rienner Publishers.<br />

ICISS (2001). The Resp<strong>on</strong>sibility to Protect. Report of the Internati<strong>on</strong>al Commissi<strong>on</strong><br />

<strong>on</strong> Interventi<strong>on</strong> and State Sovereignty. Ottawa: Internati<strong>on</strong>al Development<br />

Research Centre.<br />

Robert Picciotto et al. (2007). Global Development and Human Security. L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>:<br />

Routledge.<br />

Online Resources<br />

Our Comm<strong>on</strong> Future (1987). Report of the World Commissi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> Envir<strong>on</strong>ment<br />

and Development (Brundtland Report). UN Documents A/42/427, www.undocuments.net/ocf-11.htm#II.<br />

United Nati<strong>on</strong>s (ed.) (2003). Human Security Now: Protecting and Empowering<br />

People. New York: Communicati<strong>on</strong>s Development Inc., https://reliefweb.int/<br />

sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/91BAEEDBA50C6907C1256D19006A9353-<br />

chs-security-may03.pdf.<br />

United Nati<strong>on</strong>s (ed.) (2017). The Sustainable Development Goals Report,<br />

https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/report/2017/<br />

TheSustainableDevelopmentGoalsReport2017.pdf.<br />

Sim<strong>on</strong> Fraser University – Human Security Project, http://www.css.ethz.ch/en/<br />

services/css-partners/partner.html/13296<br />


Gender and Youth: Changing Perspective<br />

12 Gender and Youth:<br />

Changing Perspective<br />

Julian Demmer, with Nico Schernbeck, Selin Aksoy<br />

and Karla Sanel<br />

“Youth [and women] should not be <strong>on</strong> the table, but around<br />

the table.”<br />

UN Progress Study <strong>on</strong> Youth, Peace and Security<br />

Thinking in images is a useful exercise to understand how deeply<br />

gendered our associati<strong>on</strong>s with war and peace are and how<br />

n<strong>on</strong>e of us can escape “doing gender”, and indeed, “doing stereotypes”,<br />

as part of our everyday thinking and acti<strong>on</strong>s. Because<br />

habitual thoughts are the <strong>on</strong>es we questi<strong>on</strong> least, gender studies<br />

are a helpful tool in making us aware of how individual identities<br />

are shaped. They also help to critically analyse the social<br />


Gender and Youth: Changing Perspective<br />

GENDER | the fact of being male or female, especially when c<strong>on</strong>sidered<br />

with reference to social and cultural differences, not differences<br />

in biology<br />

YOUTH | a transiti<strong>on</strong>al phase from childhood to adolescence<br />

Both can be seen as socially c<strong>on</strong>structed categories that are associated<br />

with assigned roles, statuses, duties and resp<strong>on</strong>sibilities.<br />

Transformative approaches broaden our view to acknowledge the<br />

positive c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong>s by all, but also highlight the c<strong>on</strong>stricting<br />

c<strong>on</strong>sequences of certain roles and ascripti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

c<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong> of “masculinities” and “femininities” and the gendered<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong> of public and private life in war- and peacetime,<br />

as Cordula Reimann has pointed out. In c<strong>on</strong>trast to gender,<br />

which c<strong>on</strong>tinuously shapes individuals’ (self-)percepti<strong>on</strong>,<br />

youth is a transiti<strong>on</strong>al phase from childhood to adolescence. It<br />

is associated with certain milest<strong>on</strong>es within socio-ec<strong>on</strong>omic and<br />

cultural c<strong>on</strong>texts and, therefore, does not allow for a universally<br />

agreed numerical definiti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Turning to the numerous comm<strong>on</strong>alities between gender and<br />

youth, both can be seen as socially c<strong>on</strong>structed categories that<br />

are associated with assigned roles, statuses, duties and resp<strong>on</strong>sibilities.<br />

It is comm<strong>on</strong>ly acknowledged that both women and<br />

youth are disproporti<strong>on</strong>ately affected by violence and c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

However, both groups are often overlooked and marginalised in<br />

peace processes. The internati<strong>on</strong>al women, peace, and security<br />

and the youth, peace, and security communities therefore have<br />

complementary agendas, which seek to shed light <strong>on</strong> women<br />

and youth not <strong>on</strong>ly as victims of violence during times of c<strong>on</strong>flict,<br />

but also as positive change agents in transforming c<strong>on</strong>flicts.<br />

Ultimately, it is essential to look at (young) women’s and young<br />

men’s unique experiences of c<strong>on</strong>flict and violence in order to<br />

meaningfully include their voices and change perspectives.<br />


Gender and Youth: Changing Perspective<br />

Imagine …<br />

When you close your eyes and think about “war”, what do you<br />

see? If you see a pers<strong>on</strong>, is it a man or a woman, and is she old<br />

or young? Do you see a raped man lying dead <strong>on</strong> the ground with<br />

his crying children around him? Do you see a young girl with a<br />

grimy face pointing her AK-47 at you? What about the people at<br />

the c<strong>on</strong>ference shaking hands as they sign a peace agreement?<br />

Do you imagine them as women or men, young or old?<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> through a gender and youth lens<br />

While often neglected, gender- and youth-sensitive perspectives<br />

c<strong>on</strong>stitute important analytical dimensi<strong>on</strong>s of c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

both in terms of understanding causes and effects of (violent)<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict and in identifying means for their transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

On a macro level, such perspectives c<strong>on</strong>sider patriarchal and<br />

ger<strong>on</strong>tocratic structures and the resulting (in)equalities to be<br />

root causes of c<strong>on</strong>flict. Women and young people tend to be excluded<br />

from formal and informal socio-political and ec<strong>on</strong>omic<br />

spaces. Often, traditi<strong>on</strong>al and cultural norms lend (advanced)<br />

age and (male) gender power and authority, thereby establishing<br />

hierarchies that prevent youth or women from entering political<br />

spheres and decisi<strong>on</strong>-making arenas.<br />

This structural exclusi<strong>on</strong> is most vivid in formal peace processes,<br />

which tend to be the preserve of older males. Prevailing simplistic<br />

stereotypes – such as the youth-bulge-violence nexus, c<strong>on</strong>flating<br />

young male populati<strong>on</strong>s with violence, or viewing women<br />

as passive victims – further hinder their active engagement<br />

in peace processes. In turn, this violence of exclusi<strong>on</strong> fosters the<br />

very negative stereotypes that lead to their marginalisati<strong>on</strong> in the<br />

first place, which risks certain groups resorting to violence as a<br />

means of resolving c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />


Gender and Youth: Changing Perspective<br />

On a micro level, the perspectives <strong>on</strong> women and youth in c<strong>on</strong>texts<br />

of violent c<strong>on</strong>flict have l<strong>on</strong>g focused <strong>on</strong> the role of women<br />

as victims and young men as perpetrators of violence and spoilers<br />

of peace. These stereotypical views may be internalised and<br />

projected <strong>on</strong>to peers, further strengthening negative perspectives<br />

and fuelling destructive spirals of violence. Certainly, young<br />

men represent the majority of fighters and c<strong>on</strong>sequently the majority<br />

of casualties in armed violence and young women suffer<br />

most from gender-based violence (UNFPA 2015, 21). Yet these<br />

tendencies mask multifaceted experiences. Men too become victims<br />

of gender-based violence. The role of female combatants is<br />

increasingly being explored, with the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> at the<br />

forefr<strong>on</strong>t of acti<strong>on</strong> research <strong>on</strong> female ex-combatants’ post-war<br />

leadership roles.<br />

Finally, it is essential not to overlook the fact that the vast majority<br />

of young people are not involved in violence. For a l<strong>on</strong>g time,<br />

the predominance of stereotypical victim and perpetrator perspectives<br />

neglected the key roles of women and young people in<br />

preventing violence, transforming c<strong>on</strong>flict and sustaining peace.<br />

In recent years, interest has slowly turned towards these missing<br />

pieces and more differentiated analysis, by highlighting the<br />

various ways in which these actors have exerted their positive<br />

agency in formal and informal peace processes. Although their<br />

full potential remains poorly understood, recent studies indicate<br />

the positive c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong>s of women’s participati<strong>on</strong> in peace processes,<br />

especially when they influence decisi<strong>on</strong>-making (O’Reilly<br />

2015). Likewise, anecdotal evidence of young people’s activities<br />

in peace processes – ranging from raising awareness of peace<br />

and justice to facilitating dialogue or even negotiati<strong>on</strong>s with<br />

armed groups <strong>on</strong> behalf of their communities – sketch a promising<br />

youth space of c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, which has been overlooked<br />

for too l<strong>on</strong>g.<br />


Gender and Youth: Changing Perspective<br />

The practiti<strong>on</strong>er’s perspective<br />

Emphasising the moral and pragmatic imperative of taking<br />

women and youth into account, UN Security Council Resoluti<strong>on</strong><br />

1325 <strong>on</strong> women, peace, and security and then Resoluti<strong>on</strong> 2250 <strong>on</strong><br />

youth, peace, and security have boosted the producti<strong>on</strong> of policy<br />

guidelines, planning toolboxes and less<strong>on</strong>s learned reports. Gender<br />

and youth mainstreaming are increasingly understood as<br />

important instruments for planning and implementing inclusive<br />

and effective peacebuilding interventi<strong>on</strong>s. However, there are<br />

still many c<strong>on</strong>ceptual and methodological challenges to address<br />

in order to make c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> a truly gender-sensitive<br />

and youth-inclusive endeavour. These range from the c<strong>on</strong>cepti<strong>on</strong><br />

of gender analysis as primarily c<strong>on</strong>cerned with “women’s<br />

issues” and gender experts as necessarily being women, to the<br />

percepti<strong>on</strong> of gender and youth mainstreaming as an annoying<br />

“must” and additi<strong>on</strong>al workload instead of a helpful tool to improve<br />

planning and enhance the effectiveness and sustainability<br />

of interventi<strong>on</strong>s. Despite it being an obviously heterogeneous<br />

group, definiti<strong>on</strong>s of youth tend to be overly simplistic and<br />

gender-equal, missing the specific needs, interests and positi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

of young people in peace processes and therefore hampering efforts<br />

aimed at meaningful inclusi<strong>on</strong>. Even when they are included<br />

in peace processes, this inclusi<strong>on</strong> is very restricted, tokenistic<br />

and limited to “youth issues” such as educati<strong>on</strong> or employment,<br />

instead of providing or strengthening existing spaces where they<br />

interact and engage with other stakeholders, perhaps eventually<br />

transforming existing power hierarchies.<br />

Changing perspectives … but a l<strong>on</strong>g way to go<br />

The peacebuilding field in general has come a l<strong>on</strong>g way in developing<br />

policy frameworks that reflect a mature perspective<br />

<strong>on</strong> actors, processes, causes and transformati<strong>on</strong> of c<strong>on</strong>flicts<br />

(→ Building and Sustaining Peace; → Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict). The<br />

United Nati<strong>on</strong>s Secretary-General’s preventi<strong>on</strong> and sustaining<br />

peace agendas and the associated women, peace, and security<br />

and youth, peace, and security agendas are prominent examples<br />


Gender and Youth: Changing Perspective<br />

in this respect that emphasise the important role that traditi<strong>on</strong>ally<br />

marginalised actors like women and young people play in<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>. However, in order to translate these<br />

norms into practices that would foster genuine, c<strong>on</strong>text-specific<br />

and therefore meaningful inclusi<strong>on</strong> of women and young people<br />

in formal and informal peace processes, interventi<strong>on</strong>s need to<br />

be based <strong>on</strong> a complex understanding about their unique roles<br />

and qualities to shape peace processes as well as the specific<br />

challenges to their inclusi<strong>on</strong>. Applying a gender and youth lens<br />

unveils spaces of the everyday where these actors work for peace<br />

– as explored, for example, by Mir Mubashir and Irena Grizelj.<br />

Strengthening these efforts and encouraging others to engage<br />

will help in overcoming prevailing negative stereotypes and render<br />

the positive agency of women and young people more visible,<br />

doing justice to the multitude of roles they can play – so that <strong>on</strong>e<br />

day we might close our eyes and think about war as something<br />

that women and men, young and old together are able to prevent.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Raewyn W. C<strong>on</strong>nell (2005). Masculinities. (2nd editi<strong>on</strong>.) Berkeley: University of<br />

California Press.<br />

Diana Francis (2004). Culture, Power Asymmetries and Gender in C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

in: Alex Austin et al. (eds.). Transforming Ethnopolitical C<strong>on</strong>flict. The<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, 91–107.<br />

Stina Maria Lundström and Shadia Marhaban (2016). Challenges and Opportunities<br />

for Female Combatants’ Post-war Community Leadership: Less<strong>on</strong>s Learnt<br />

from Aceh and Mindanao. Workshop Report. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Mir Mubashir and Irena Grizelj (2018). The Youth Space of Dialogue and Mediati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

An Explorati<strong>on</strong>. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Marie O’Reilly (2015). Why Women? Inclusive Security and Peaceful Societies.<br />

Inclusive Security Report, October 2015.<br />

Cordula Reimann (2002). “All You Need Is Love” ... and What About Gender?<br />

Engendering Burt<strong>on</strong>’s Human Needs Theory. Working Paper 10. Bradford:<br />

University of Bradford.<br />

UNFPA (2015) State of World Populati<strong>on</strong> 2015. Shelter from the Storm. A Transformative<br />

Agenda for Women and Girls in a Crisis-pr<strong>on</strong>e World. United<br />

Nati<strong>on</strong>s Populati<strong>on</strong> Fund.<br />


Gender and Youth: Changing Perspective<br />

Online Resources<br />

Internati<strong>on</strong>al Civil Society Acti<strong>on</strong> Network [ICAN] (2018), The Better Peace Tool<br />

(2nd editi<strong>on</strong>). http://www.icanpeacework.org/our-work/better-peaceinitiative/.<br />

Progress Study <strong>on</strong> Youth, Peace and Security (2018), https://www.youth4peace.<br />

info<br />

Refugee Law Project “Gender Against Men” (Film, 2008), https://www.youtube.<br />

com/watch?v=mJSl99HQYXc<br />

UN 2015 - Statistics <strong>on</strong> Youth in Armed C<strong>on</strong>flict, http://www.un.org/youthenvoy/<br />

wp-c<strong>on</strong>tent/uploads/2015/06/YouthStatsArmedc<strong>on</strong>flictpdf2.pdf<br />

Women Waging Peace Initiative, https://www.inclusivesecurity.org/experts/<br />

World Health Organizati<strong>on</strong> (2018), http://www.who.int/gender-equity-rights/<br />

understanding/gender-definiti<strong>on</strong>/en/<br />


Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>: Working Together<br />

13 Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>:<br />

Working Together<br />

Stina Lundström and Damjan Denkovski<br />

“At this crucial time in our lives (….) I d<strong>on</strong>’t think you can help but<br />

be involved.”<br />

Nina Sim<strong>on</strong>e<br />

Inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong> have been steadily gaining tracti<strong>on</strong><br />

as “buzzwords” within the peacebuilding community. But what<br />

might inclusive and participatory processes look like in practice<br />

in deeply divided and war-torn societies when trust is low and<br />

competiti<strong>on</strong> for power is high? What are the opti<strong>on</strong>s for meaningful<br />

inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong> when there are major obstacles<br />

to working together but, at the same time, broad agreement is indispensable<br />

to avoid a relapse into violence? Different, c<strong>on</strong>text-<br />


Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>: Working Together<br />

INCLUSIVITY | the degree of access to important decisi<strong>on</strong>-making<br />

areas for all levels and sectors of state and society.<br />

PARTICIPATION | involves indirect or direct active engagement by<br />

either a group or an individual in a process bey<strong>on</strong>d norms and<br />

principles. Both are c<strong>on</strong>sidered crucial in peacebuilding in order<br />

to increase a sense of ownership and resp<strong>on</strong>sibility, and alleviate<br />

social grievances of exclusi<strong>on</strong> and marginalisati<strong>on</strong> of groups.<br />

specific models will be needed when negotiating ceasefires and<br />

when c<strong>on</strong>ducting Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogues (→ Breaking Deadlocks). It<br />

is helpful for the debate to disentangle the key c<strong>on</strong>cepts, challenges,<br />

opportunities and potential limitati<strong>on</strong>s of inclusivity and<br />

participati<strong>on</strong> at different stages in peace processes. In the following,<br />

we also offer some reflecti<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> which elements might<br />

facilitate the creati<strong>on</strong> of participatory and inclusive peace processes<br />

bey<strong>on</strong>d norms and principles.<br />

On terminology …<br />

Inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong> are two keywords that are often<br />

lumped together in <strong>on</strong>e sentence, or used interchangeably. Although<br />

closely related, there is a difference in nuance between<br />

the two. Broadly defined, inclusivity in peace processes refers<br />

to the degree of access to important decisi<strong>on</strong>-making areas for<br />

all levels and sectors of state and society. Inclusivity is thus a<br />

principle or a norm that can be streamlined into a process and<br />

acted <strong>on</strong>. Participati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>on</strong> the other hand, goes bey<strong>on</strong>d norms<br />

and principles and involves indirect or direct active engagement<br />

by either a group or an individual in a process.<br />


Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>: Working Together<br />

Inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong>: principles and practices<br />

There are two axes al<strong>on</strong>g which inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong> in<br />

peace processes can be “measured”. Horiz<strong>on</strong>tal inclusivity refers<br />

to the degree to which a process is inclusive towards main power<br />

holders or elites in a society. Vertical inclusivity, <strong>on</strong> the other<br />

hand, refers to the degree to which various sectors and segments<br />

of society are included (e. g. marginalised groups such as women,<br />

youth, and ethnic and religious minorities). The degree of horiz<strong>on</strong>tal<br />

and vertical inclusivity can, am<strong>on</strong>g other things, be an indicator<br />

for the level of local ownership in a peace process.<br />

That being said, inclusivity is and always will be understood and<br />

defined differently in different c<strong>on</strong>texts and cultures and by different<br />

actors within the same c<strong>on</strong>text. In some c<strong>on</strong>texts, merely<br />

to c<strong>on</strong>sult youth groups during peace negotiati<strong>on</strong>s can be seen<br />

as inclusive and participatory. In other c<strong>on</strong>texts, anything other<br />

than a 50 per cent gender quota at the main negotiating table<br />

can be seen as exclusi<strong>on</strong>ary and n<strong>on</strong>-participatory. Defining<br />

the scope and depth of inclusivity also depends <strong>on</strong> rec<strong>on</strong>ciling<br />

different views <strong>on</strong> what the c<strong>on</strong>flict is about, who the relevant<br />

stakeholders are, and who may be potential spoilers. Often,<br />

some hold (or claim) the power to decide who has the right to be<br />

included and to participate, while others have to actively fight for<br />

their right to be included or to participate. Inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong><br />

in peace processes, in other words, are often political<br />

(and politicised) and raise a host of questi<strong>on</strong>s around power (→<br />

Empowerment and Ownership).<br />

Coming to a broad agreement <strong>on</strong> what inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong><br />

are and how they can be practised in a given peace process<br />

is thus an issue in itself that often needs specific attenti<strong>on</strong> at the<br />

start of a process, especially from internati<strong>on</strong>al actors who can<br />

easily fall into the trap of oversimplifying and misunderstanding<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict and stakeholder dynamics. C<strong>on</strong>sequently, inclusivity<br />

and participati<strong>on</strong> are not <strong>on</strong>ly a questi<strong>on</strong> of going bey<strong>on</strong>d norms<br />

and principles; they also involve moving bey<strong>on</strong>d mere “box-ticking”<br />

and simple headcounts of representatives.<br />


Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>: Working Together<br />

Process and outcome inclusivity<br />

Process inclusivity<br />

Outcome inclusivity<br />

Negotiati<strong>on</strong><br />

Codificati<strong>on</strong><br />

Materialisati<strong>on</strong><br />

Graph by: Christoph Lang<br />

Figure 5, source: Dudouet/Lundström 2016<br />

What are the different forms of inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong>?<br />

Armed c<strong>on</strong>flicts tend to reflect deep structural patterns of (real<br />

or perceived) social, political or cultural exclusi<strong>on</strong>. Collective<br />

mobilisati<strong>on</strong> in violent rebelli<strong>on</strong> often results from shared grievances<br />

am<strong>on</strong>g marginalised social and political actors demanding<br />

greater participati<strong>on</strong> and inclusivity in social, political and<br />

cultural arenas (→ Addressing Social Grievances). It is therefore<br />

imperative that a peace process brings about a more inclusive<br />

state and society bey<strong>on</strong>d a negotiated peace agreement, as c<strong>on</strong>tinued<br />

political, social and cultural exclusi<strong>on</strong> is often fertile<br />

ground for violence relapse and re-mobilisati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

In general, inclusivity can be enacted in three different arenas in<br />

two ways. The arenas are negotiati<strong>on</strong> arenas (such as ceasefire<br />

negotiati<strong>on</strong>s, peace agreement negotiati<strong>on</strong>s, Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogues<br />

and C<strong>on</strong>stituent Assemblies), codificati<strong>on</strong> arenas (such as peace<br />

agreements, c<strong>on</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong>al reform, bill of rights, legal reforms),<br />

and materialisati<strong>on</strong> arenas (such as reformed instituti<strong>on</strong>s, land<br />

reforms, political party reforms and policy implementati<strong>on</strong>).<br />


Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>: Working Together<br />

The first way is process inclusivity, which describes the extent to<br />

which a peacemaking or peacebuilding forum such as ceasefire<br />

or peace negotiati<strong>on</strong>s is inclusive not <strong>on</strong>ly to the horiz<strong>on</strong>tal elite,<br />

but also to the vertical makeup of society. The sec<strong>on</strong>d is outcome<br />

inclusivity, which describes the levels of resp<strong>on</strong>siveness and representativeness<br />

of a peace agreement, new c<strong>on</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong> or instituti<strong>on</strong><br />

to all levels and sectors of society.<br />

What are the possible formulas for inclusivity and<br />

participati<strong>on</strong>?<br />

There are different models that can be used for participati<strong>on</strong> at<br />

different levels of peacemaking and peacebuilding. Some models<br />

include incremental inclusivity, which denotes a step-by-step<br />

process where the ceasefire might be negotiated by a small circle<br />

of actors due to security and/or trust c<strong>on</strong>straints, with the level<br />

of inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong> increasing when, for example,<br />

a peace agreement or new c<strong>on</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong> is being negotiated and<br />

implemented. A sec<strong>on</strong>d model is thematic multi-arena inclusivity,<br />

where, for example, land reform might be negotiated at the main<br />

(semi-exclusi<strong>on</strong>ary) table, but simultaneously more inclusively<br />

organised roundtables identify broader needs and grievances, or<br />

broader cross-sectoral c<strong>on</strong>sensus is built by civil society outside<br />

of the formal negotiati<strong>on</strong>s. A third model is parallel c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong><br />

forums with built-in mechanisms, where different channels are<br />

utilised to influence the formal negotiati<strong>on</strong>s. These parallel forums<br />

can include c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> forums, public surveys to show<br />

the people’s will <strong>on</strong> a particular matter, or petiti<strong>on</strong>s. These forums<br />

are intended to feed directly into the formal negotiati<strong>on</strong><br />

forum, to the mediators, or to the negotiators. The last model<br />

is informal deadlock-breaking mechanisms within inclusive formal<br />

arenas, such as smaller circles of trust-building processes<br />

between polarised actors within wider Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogues and<br />

C<strong>on</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong> Assembly negotiati<strong>on</strong>s (e. g. establishing deadlockbreaking<br />

committees within the Yemeni Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue process,<br />

see → Breaking Deadlocks).<br />


Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>: Working Together<br />

Challenges and ways forward<br />

Process inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong> come with ingrained tensi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />

obstacles and challenges. Some issues often faced in<br />

peace processes are: the dilemma between inclusivity and efficiency,<br />

cosmetic participati<strong>on</strong> (box-ticking) as opposed to<br />

meaningful participati<strong>on</strong>, and deliberate refusal of some actors<br />

to participate; some may even attempt to spoil the process. The<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> has been engaged in proposing ways of resolving<br />

the inclusivity-efficiency dilemma through its research<br />

project <strong>on</strong> post-war inclusive political settlements. In some c<strong>on</strong>texts,<br />

the subjective percepti<strong>on</strong> that n<strong>on</strong>-elite interests are being<br />

c<strong>on</strong>sidered may be sufficient; it may even be more important<br />

than the objective inclusi<strong>on</strong> of stakeholders in the process itself.<br />

In others, including <strong>on</strong>e n<strong>on</strong>-state armed group may lead to increased<br />

violence by n<strong>on</strong>-participating groups. Alternatively, it<br />

may dem<strong>on</strong>strate the benefits of a negotiated settlement, thus<br />

challenging the rati<strong>on</strong>ale for violence.<br />

Apart from overcoming process-oriented challenges, there may<br />

be a lack of capacity or funds to support outcome inclusivity, for<br />

example in implementati<strong>on</strong> of peace agreements or state reform.<br />

There may also be a lack of genuine political and social<br />

will to meaningfully transform the root causes of c<strong>on</strong>flict; agreed<br />

mechanisms and/or procedures for implementati<strong>on</strong> may also be<br />

absent or could not be agreed up<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Internati<strong>on</strong>al actors should c<strong>on</strong>sider the l<strong>on</strong>g-term impact of<br />

efforts to support peace processes or provide development aid,<br />

both of which entail decisi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> inclusivity vs efficiency and<br />

elite c<strong>on</strong>sensus vs broader buy in and (often in c<strong>on</strong>juncti<strong>on</strong> with<br />

other actors’ programming) can inadvertently but significantly<br />

influence the power balance and overall directi<strong>on</strong> of the process.<br />

There is no single blueprint for addressing the dilemmas and<br />

challenges regarding inclusivity and participati<strong>on</strong> in peace processes.<br />

Planning and sequencing mechanisms for inclusivity is<br />

key, and various models may be needed at different stages of<br />

the process. Process design should therefore be based <strong>on</strong> a solid<br />


Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>: Working Together<br />

understanding of the c<strong>on</strong>text and c<strong>on</strong>flict dynamics, and the process<br />

itself should remain flexible enough to adapt to changes in<br />

local c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Clare Castillejo (2014). Promoting Inclusi<strong>on</strong> in Political Settlements: A Priority for<br />

Internati<strong>on</strong>al Actors? Oslo: Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Centre.<br />

Vér<strong>on</strong>ique Dudouet & Stina Lundström (2016). Post-war Political Settlements:<br />

From Participatory Transiti<strong>on</strong> Processes to Inclusive State-building and Governance.<br />

Research Report. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Marike Blunk et al. (2017). Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue Handbook: A Guide for Practiti<strong>on</strong>ers.<br />

Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Katrin Planta (2015). Broadening and Deepening Participati<strong>on</strong> in Peace Negotiati<strong>on</strong>s:<br />

A Strategic Framework. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Online Resources<br />

Political Settlement Research Programme, http://www.politicalsettlements.org/<br />

publicati<strong>on</strong>s-library/<br />

Inclusive Peace and Transiti<strong>on</strong> Initiative, http://www.inclusivepeace.org/<br />

Inclusive Security, https://www.inclusivesecurity.org/<br />

Project: Inclusive Political Settlements, https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/<br />

programmes/c<strong>on</strong>flict-transformati<strong>on</strong>-research/completed-projects/inclusivepolitical-settlements/<br />


Learning Together: M<strong>on</strong>itoring, Evaluating, Reflecting<br />

14 Learning Together:<br />

M<strong>on</strong>itoring, Evaluating,<br />

Reflecting<br />

Barbara Unger and Beatrix Austin<br />

“We are not what we know but what we are willing to learn.”<br />

Mary Catherine Bates<strong>on</strong><br />

Why reflect when there is so much to do? In complex settings,<br />

such as a protracted c<strong>on</strong>flict, we as practiti<strong>on</strong>ers trying to improve<br />

the situati<strong>on</strong> must reduce complexity and identify key<br />

dynamics. This is challenging, and we often find in hindsight<br />

that we could have d<strong>on</strong>e better. Our own ability to adapt to the<br />

challenges we face is therefore of key importance. One way is to<br />

learn from what we did in the past and how well that worked,<br />


Learning Together: M<strong>on</strong>itoring, Evaluating, Reflecting<br />

MONITORING | the regular examinati<strong>on</strong> of and reflecti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> the<br />

“gap” between the expected outcome of an interventi<strong>on</strong> and the<br />

actual outcome, with activities and agendas being adapted <strong>on</strong><br />

the basis of this “incremental learning”.<br />

EVALUATION | the investigati<strong>on</strong> of the quality, efficiency and relevance<br />

of a course of acti<strong>on</strong>, measuring its outcomes and impact<br />

against a theory of change.<br />

LEARNING | the process of acquiring new, or modifying existing,<br />

knowledge, behaviours, skills, values, or preferences.<br />

and by observing current activities and assessing their scope for<br />

improvement. Other ways might be more transformative, such as<br />

scenario and futures work or a review of organisati<strong>on</strong>al theories<br />

of change and assumpti<strong>on</strong>s of success.<br />

For individuals and organisati<strong>on</strong>s working <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flict and peace,<br />

the failure to reflect and learn could lead to errors being repeated<br />

and opportunities being ignored. Learning relates to us as pers<strong>on</strong>s,<br />

at the individual level, and as an organisati<strong>on</strong>. It calls for<br />

open-mindedness and a readiness for change, and requires time,<br />

structures, tools and methods.<br />

“M & E” – m<strong>on</strong>itoring and evaluati<strong>on</strong> – is an essential element of<br />

reflecti<strong>on</strong> and learning processes and is intrinsic to project management<br />

in c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

M<strong>on</strong>itoring refers to the regular examinati<strong>on</strong> of and reflecti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong><br />

the “gap” between the expected outcome of an interventi<strong>on</strong> and<br />

the actual outcome, with activities and agendas being adapted<br />

<strong>on</strong> the basis of this “incremental learning”. It therefore largely<br />

depends <strong>on</strong> explicit objectives and clear plans showing how they<br />

are to be accomplished and reviewed. In c<strong>on</strong>flict settings, projects<br />

and programmes must also include an envir<strong>on</strong>mental m<strong>on</strong>itoring<br />

comp<strong>on</strong>ent to detect any negative impacts of the project<br />


Learning Together: M<strong>on</strong>itoring, Evaluating, Reflecting<br />

<strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>text, as well as any risks the c<strong>on</strong>flict setting may pose<br />

to the project. A c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive m<strong>on</strong>itoring system, as well as<br />

a c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> m<strong>on</strong>itoring system, would therefore<br />

need indicators for the effects, both intended and unintended,<br />

and changing risks.<br />

Evaluati<strong>on</strong> is complementary to c<strong>on</strong>tinuous project m<strong>on</strong>itoring<br />

and takes place at various intervals after the implementati<strong>on</strong> of a<br />

project or project comp<strong>on</strong>ent. It may be internal (self-evaluati<strong>on</strong>)<br />

or external (evaluati<strong>on</strong> by others combined with relevant feedback<br />

from / to stakeholders). Often, a mixture of the two is used.<br />

Evaluati<strong>on</strong> can be categorised by the desired aims, interacti<strong>on</strong><br />

between evaluator and team (internal, external, joint), or focus/<br />

timing. Formative evaluati<strong>on</strong>s look at progress to date and recommend<br />

improvements, while summative evaluati<strong>on</strong>s measure<br />

overall achievement, mostly after an interventi<strong>on</strong>. Impact evaluati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

take place sometime after the interventi<strong>on</strong> and focus <strong>on</strong><br />

the changes the project produced in the c<strong>on</strong>flict c<strong>on</strong>text.<br />

M<strong>on</strong>itoring and evaluati<strong>on</strong>: results chains and theories<br />

of change<br />

Reflecti<strong>on</strong>, and especially m<strong>on</strong>itoring and evaluati<strong>on</strong>, relies <strong>on</strong><br />

clarity. M<strong>on</strong>itoring and evaluati<strong>on</strong> is aided when assumpti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

and hypotheses are identified in the planning phase of a project<br />

and clearly stated in documents, for example as results chains<br />

and indicators. Another popular method is the use of explicit<br />

theories of change. This quest for clarity is even more important<br />

in polarised settings, where shared understandings cannot be<br />

assumed: communicati<strong>on</strong> must cross the divides of culture, language<br />

and distance.<br />

This leads to a c<strong>on</strong>stant questi<strong>on</strong>ing of self and partners: do we<br />

have a shared understanding of our goals and how we hope to<br />

reach them? How helpful explicit hypotheses are for better c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> can be illustrated by the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s<br />

work <strong>on</strong> the educati<strong>on</strong> system in Bolivia. There, we for-<br />


Learning Together: M<strong>on</strong>itoring, Evaluating, Reflecting<br />

mulated the following results chain: an activity (e. g. a problemsolving<br />

workshop) facilitates outputs (the ability to understand<br />

multiple perspectives), which in turn result in outcomes (a<br />

change in the way people relate to <strong>on</strong>e another). In the l<strong>on</strong>g run,<br />

this develops more far-reaching impact (such as a reducti<strong>on</strong> in<br />

violence in a polarised community).<br />

Every<strong>on</strong>e’s percepti<strong>on</strong> of reality is limited. That being the case, it<br />

is essential to assess the accuracy of any linear hypothesis: “acti<strong>on</strong><br />

A results in outcome B”. We must be open to the possibility<br />

that other important factors have been missed or ignored. While<br />

working in Bolivia, it became clear to the project team that it was<br />

necessary to maintain c<strong>on</strong>tact with the Ministry of Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

even after the integrati<strong>on</strong> of the Peace Culture programme in the<br />

C<strong>on</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong> and sectoral law, in order to m<strong>on</strong>itor how the Ministry<br />

intended to anchor Peace Culture in its own regulati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

Criteria for assessing activities in c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> and<br />

peacebuilding have been set out by the Development Assistance<br />

Committee of the Organisati<strong>on</strong> for Ec<strong>on</strong>omic Co-operati<strong>on</strong> and<br />

Development (OECD-DAC). According to these criteria, it is essential<br />

to ask “are we doing it / did we do it right?” and to look<br />

at efficiency (balancing means and ends) and effectiveness (“did<br />

we reach the objectives”?) We should also c<strong>on</strong>sider whether the<br />

changes effected are likely to be sustainable. An important indicator<br />

of success is the assessed impact of the project, i. e. whether<br />

the project c<strong>on</strong>tributes to goals bey<strong>on</strong>d its sphere of influence.<br />

Coherence refers to whether the interventi<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>tributes to or<br />

counteracts other interventi<strong>on</strong>s. Moreover, it is important that an<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong> reflects <strong>on</strong> the relevance of any activity (“did we do<br />

the right thing?”) Reflecti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> the relevance of an interventi<strong>on</strong><br />

in any given c<strong>on</strong>text goes bey<strong>on</strong>d comm<strong>on</strong> reflective practice<br />

and is thus absent from many m<strong>on</strong>itoring frameworks. There is<br />

a danger, particularly in the field of c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, that<br />

practiti<strong>on</strong>ers implement projects or programmes, which, despite<br />

being exciting, interesting and seemingly c<strong>on</strong>ducive to peace,<br />

lack the organisati<strong>on</strong>al structure or coherence with other pro-<br />


Learning Together: M<strong>on</strong>itoring, Evaluating, Reflecting<br />

jects required for genuine c<strong>on</strong>textual change bey<strong>on</strong>d a limited<br />

number of participants.<br />

Bey<strong>on</strong>d m<strong>on</strong>itoring and evaluati<strong>on</strong>: loops of reflecti<strong>on</strong><br />

and learning<br />

Learning and change can be based <strong>on</strong> various levels of reflecti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

The easiest and most comm<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong>e is changing acti<strong>on</strong>s: we can<br />

then try to change the input to get another result. But, and this is<br />

the sec<strong>on</strong>d level, maybe things are not so linear, and our assumpti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

have been flawed? And, more complex still, how can we as<br />

a team or organisati<strong>on</strong> overcome such a blind spot in the future?<br />

The deepest level of reflecti<strong>on</strong>, known as “transformati<strong>on</strong>al learning”,<br />

is aimed at changing underlying patterns and designing new<br />

learning processes. Here, the interest centres less <strong>on</strong> what the field<br />

still has to learn with regard to c<strong>on</strong>tent – “what to do” – and more<br />

<strong>on</strong> how to create the best possible c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s to learn <strong>on</strong> different<br />

levels and adjust acti<strong>on</strong>s accordingly, which is especially important<br />

in the field of peacebuilding and c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>. This<br />

“learning about learning” is crucial, since even the best efforts at<br />

transformative peace work may be ineffective if we fail to learn the<br />

less<strong>on</strong>s available to us. Reflecti<strong>on</strong> should cover all elements, such<br />

as access, language skills, funding sources, pers<strong>on</strong>nel and effective<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong>al structures: a successful combinati<strong>on</strong> of all of<br />

these is necessary for effective and sustainable change.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>tinuing to improve<br />

One main challenge in practice is that the logic of resp<strong>on</strong>ding<br />

quickly in an ever-changing envir<strong>on</strong>ment, such as intervening<br />

in a violent c<strong>on</strong>flict, is not c<strong>on</strong>ducive to simultaneous reflecti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

It seems that sometimes there needs to be an impulse from the<br />

outside, from a pers<strong>on</strong> or group specifically tasked with prompting<br />

reflecti<strong>on</strong>, in order to create the required space in a hectic<br />

schedule, and to encourage a shift of emphasis from the practical<br />

to the reflective.<br />


Learning Together: M<strong>on</strong>itoring, Evaluating, Reflecting<br />

Learning in loops<br />

Planning<br />

a project<br />

implementati<strong>on</strong><br />

?<br />

expected out comes<br />

achieved?<br />

single loop learning<br />

double loop learning<br />

triple loop learning<br />

Figure 6, source: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, Barbara Unger<br />

An organisati<strong>on</strong>al culture c<strong>on</strong>ducive to reflecti<strong>on</strong> and learning, in<br />

the peacebuilding field and elsewhere, entails the allocati<strong>on</strong> of<br />

specific time slots, incentives, mechanisms and resp<strong>on</strong>sibilities<br />

to reflective practice, whilst also recognising the value of ad hoc<br />

meetings, even those as informal as a cup of tea with colleagues<br />

or an after-work ride home with the project partner. Organisati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

can benefit greatly from events outside the usual routine,<br />


Learning Together: M<strong>on</strong>itoring, Evaluating, Reflecting<br />

yes<br />

End<br />

of project<br />

?<br />

expected impact<br />

achieved?<br />

no<br />

learning<br />

for next time<br />

changing input<br />

variables<br />

= incremental learning<br />

are we<br />

doing things<br />

right?<br />

?<br />

questi<strong>on</strong>ing<br />

goals, assumti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

are we<br />

doing<br />

the right things?<br />

?<br />

= sec<strong>on</strong>d order learning<br />

detecting<br />

blind spots<br />

= learning to learn<br />

how do we<br />

decide what is<br />

right<br />

?<br />

Graph by: Christoph Lang<br />

such as retreats or visits from headquarters or external evaluators.<br />

Within the field of c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, more methods<br />

of developing an internalised culture of reflecti<strong>on</strong> and learning<br />

(about failures and successes) must be identified. It goes without<br />

saying that the commitment of the leadership in any setting is<br />

vital to this development.<br />


Learning Together: M<strong>on</strong>itoring, Evaluating, Reflecting<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Chris Argyris and D<strong>on</strong>ald A. Schoen (1978). Organizati<strong>on</strong>al Learning: A Theory of<br />

Acti<strong>on</strong> Perspective. Reading, MA: Addis<strong>on</strong>-Wesley.<br />

Mille Bojer (2018). Transformative Scenarios Process: How stories of the future<br />

help to transform c<strong>on</strong>flict in the present. In <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook for C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Transformati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>on</strong>line editi<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey (2009). Immunity to Change. How to Overcome It<br />

and Unlock the Potential in Yourself and Your Organizati<strong>on</strong>. Cambridge, MA:<br />

Harvard Business Press.<br />

OECD (2012). Evaluating Peacebuilding Activities in Settings of C<strong>on</strong>flict and Fragility:<br />

Improving Learning for Results. DAC Guidelines and References Series.<br />

Paris: OECD.<br />

Cheyanne Scharbatke-Church (2011). Evaluating Peacebuilding – Not Yet All It<br />

Could Be, in: Beatrix Austin et al. (eds.). Advancing C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook II. Opladen/Farmingt<strong>on</strong> Hills: Barbara Budrich<br />

Publishers, 459–482.<br />

Online Resources<br />

CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, with seminal work <strong>on</strong> Reflecting <strong>on</strong> Peace<br />

Practice and Peacebuilding Effectiveness, https://www.cdacollaborative.org/<br />

what-we-do/peacebuilding-effectiveness/<br />

FriEnt (2014). How do I know? Strategic Planning, Learning and Evaluati<strong>on</strong><br />

for Peacebuilding. B<strong>on</strong>n: FriEnt. https://www.frient.de/publikati<strong>on</strong>en/<br />

dokument/?tx_ggfilelibrary_pi1 %5Bfile %5D=202&tx_ggfilelibrary_<br />

pi1 %5Bacti<strong>on</strong> %5D=download&cHash=840af8f879106850b23139334<br />

8c67170<br />

Ulrike Hopp and Barbara Unger (2008). Time to Learn: Expanding Organisati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

Capacities in C<strong>on</strong>flict Settings. In: Peacebuilding at a Crossroads? Dilemmas<br />

and Paths for Another Generati<strong>on</strong>. Edited by Martina Fischer and Beatrix<br />

Schmelzle. <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook Dialogue Series No. 7. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Research Center for C<strong>on</strong>structive C<strong>on</strong>flict Management, https://image.<br />

berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Handbook/<br />

Dialogue_Chapters/dialogue7_hoppunger_comm.pdf.<br />

ifa/zivik (2014). M<strong>on</strong>itoring of effects (movie): Effects-oriented Planning and<br />

Implementati<strong>on</strong> of Projects Working to Promote Peace – A Manual. Sec<strong>on</strong>d<br />

editi<strong>on</strong>. Berlin: ifa/zivik. https://www.ifa.de/fileadmin/pdf/zivik/movie_<br />

Manual_en.pdf<br />

Patricia Rogers (2014). Theory of Change. Methodological Issue Briefs: Impact<br />

Evaluati<strong>on</strong> No. 2. UNICEF. http://devinfolive.info/impact_evaluati<strong>on</strong>/img/<br />

downloads/Theory_of_Change_ENG.pdf (including webinar at https://www.<br />

betterevaluati<strong>on</strong>.org/en/resources/overview/UNICEF_Webinar_ToC)<br />


Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support<br />

15 Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

Support<br />

Luxshi Vimalarajah and Mir Mubashir<br />

“Start from where the c<strong>on</strong>flict parties are, not where the third<br />

party wants them to be.”<br />

Oliver Ramsbotham<br />

In 2016, “more countries experienced violent c<strong>on</strong>flict than at any<br />

time in nearly 30 years“ (World Bank Group and United Nati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

2018, iii, quoting UCDP 2017). Today’s c<strong>on</strong>flicts are complex, multifaceted<br />

and fragmented. They often require a mixture of tools and<br />

approaches to manage and resolve them in a sustainable manner.<br />

Increasingly, the internati<strong>on</strong>al trend seems to be moving in the directi<strong>on</strong><br />

of repressive or violent resp<strong>on</strong>ses to c<strong>on</strong>flict. The statistical<br />


Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support<br />

MEDIATION (SUPPORT) | the invited assistance of a third party<br />

to help organise the flow of communicati<strong>on</strong> and to support the<br />

creati<strong>on</strong> of opti<strong>on</strong>s between c<strong>on</strong>flict and negotiati<strong>on</strong> partners, in<br />

short a type of “assisted negotiati<strong>on</strong>”.<br />

evidence, however, shows that military interventi<strong>on</strong> in c<strong>on</strong>flicts<br />

that are often driven by unmet ethnic, social, ec<strong>on</strong>omic or political<br />

grievances does not c<strong>on</strong>tribute to the resoluti<strong>on</strong> of c<strong>on</strong>flicts. On<br />

the c<strong>on</strong>trary, such interventi<strong>on</strong>s exacerbate them and even create<br />

new fault-lines and grievances (→ Addressing Social Grievances).<br />

In this c<strong>on</strong>text, n<strong>on</strong>-violent third-party-assisted peacemaking<br />

tools become all the more important. Al<strong>on</strong>gside dialogue (facilitati<strong>on</strong>),<br />

mediati<strong>on</strong> and mediati<strong>on</strong> support have become essential<br />

pillars in the gamut of peacemaking tools. The main difference<br />

between negotiati<strong>on</strong> and mediati<strong>on</strong> lies in the role of the<br />

third party. The negotiati<strong>on</strong> process can be broadly defined as<br />

<strong>on</strong>e in which the c<strong>on</strong>flict parties engage with each other to reach<br />

C<strong>on</strong>tinuum of c<strong>on</strong>flict management approaches<br />

Informal decisi<strong>on</strong>-making by c<strong>on</strong>flict parties<br />

Informal<br />

third-party<br />

decisi<strong>on</strong>making<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict avoidance<br />

Negotiati<strong>on</strong> Mediati<strong>on</strong> Arbitrati<strong>on</strong><br />

Figure 7, source: Christopher Moore, 2003<br />


Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support<br />

an agreement mostly without the assistance of a third party (although<br />

some backchannel facilitati<strong>on</strong> my take place, see → Facilitating<br />

Dialogue and Negotiati<strong>on</strong>). The central defining feature of<br />

a mediati<strong>on</strong> process is the presence of a third-party mediator to<br />

organise the flow of communicati<strong>on</strong>. This role may also be taken<br />

by insider mediators.<br />

Although mediati<strong>on</strong> is defined in a variety of ways, in essence<br />

all of the definiti<strong>on</strong>s agree <strong>on</strong> a few core fundamentals: the voluntary<br />

and c<strong>on</strong>fidential nature of the process, the impartiality<br />

of the mediator, and that the soluti<strong>on</strong>s are generated by the<br />

parties themselves, rather than being imposed by the mediator.<br />

Mediati<strong>on</strong>, in its essence, can therefore be defined as assisted<br />

negotiati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Actors and styles<br />

As the number of c<strong>on</strong>flicts increases, so too does the number of<br />

third-party mediati<strong>on</strong> actors involved in the internati<strong>on</strong>al field:<br />

traditi<strong>on</strong>al peacemakers such as the UN, single states, regi<strong>on</strong>al<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong>s, n<strong>on</strong>-governmental organisati<strong>on</strong>s and individuals<br />

Legal (public)<br />

authoritative<br />

third-party<br />

decisi<strong>on</strong>making<br />

Extralegal coerced decisi<strong>on</strong>-making<br />

Adjudicati<strong>on</strong> N<strong>on</strong>-violent directive acti<strong>on</strong> Violence<br />

Increased coerci<strong>on</strong> and likelihood of win-lose outcome<br />

Graph by: Christoph Lang<br />


Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support<br />

(eminent pers<strong>on</strong>s) all play a role in mediating c<strong>on</strong>flict with varying<br />

degrees of success.<br />

These actors may employ different styles of mediati<strong>on</strong>: formulative,<br />

facilitative or directive/power-based mediati<strong>on</strong>, and transformative<br />

mediati<strong>on</strong>. In reality, mediati<strong>on</strong> processes exhibit<br />

features of all of these different styles in <strong>on</strong>e single mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

process in order to be more effective.<br />

In formulative mediati<strong>on</strong> processes, the mediator acts as a<br />

formulator of ideas, devising and proposing new soluti<strong>on</strong>s to the<br />

disputants.<br />

The facilitative style of mediati<strong>on</strong> focuses <strong>on</strong> the relati<strong>on</strong>ship<br />

between the parties; here, the aim is to increase mutual understanding<br />

between the parties in order to help them reach a mutually<br />

acceptable agreement.<br />

State-based mediators usually resort to power-based mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

where the mediator uses his/her leverage and power to influence<br />

the negotiati<strong>on</strong> process, its c<strong>on</strong>tent and its outcomes. A<br />

comm<strong>on</strong> approach in such processes is to use “carrots and sticks”<br />

to induce parties to pursue a specific trajectory.<br />

Transformative mediati<strong>on</strong> is aimed at empowering c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

parties to recognise each other’s needs, interests, values and<br />

points of view, so that their relati<strong>on</strong>ships may be transformed<br />

during the mediati<strong>on</strong> process. It supports the parties in determining<br />

the directi<strong>on</strong> of their own process: they structure both<br />

the process and the outcome of mediati<strong>on</strong>, and the mediator follows<br />

their lead.<br />

A point of c<strong>on</strong>tenti<strong>on</strong> for all is the level of multipartiality, impartiality<br />

or neutrality a mediator must possess. We find in our practice<br />

at the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> that multipartiality is a beneficial<br />

stance in working with c<strong>on</strong>flict parties.<br />

Insider mediators<br />

Rootedness/embeddedness in the c<strong>on</strong>flict c<strong>on</strong>text give insider<br />

mediators heightened credibility and legitimacy in the eyes of<br />


Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support<br />

many. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally, the influence and authority that insider mediators<br />

bring to a process may provide them access to c<strong>on</strong>flict actors<br />

who would be unavailable to others (e. g. radical or “hard to reach<br />

actors”). Insider mediators are affiliated to <strong>on</strong>e or the other c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

party either by ethnicity or by some other link, and therefore<br />

cannot be expected to be impartial or neutral, yet are c<strong>on</strong>sidered<br />

fair and trustworthy by the c<strong>on</strong>flict parties. Insiders are intrinsic<br />

to the c<strong>on</strong>flict c<strong>on</strong>text, i.e. they are part of the social fabric of the<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict. Their lives are directly affected by it. They may have a<br />

stake in the c<strong>on</strong>flict but will not be swayed by it, and prefer n<strong>on</strong>violent<br />

means of addressing the c<strong>on</strong>flict. They draw <strong>on</strong> traditi<strong>on</strong>,<br />

religi<strong>on</strong>, spirituality and also secularism, pluralism or multiculturalism<br />

to mediate c<strong>on</strong>flicts. The legitimacy of insider mediators,<br />

depending <strong>on</strong> the dynamics of the c<strong>on</strong>flict c<strong>on</strong>text, may, however,<br />

be in c<strong>on</strong>stant flux and thus call for outsider involvement. In traditi<strong>on</strong>al,<br />

patriarchal societies, certain insider mediators may also<br />

be less inclusive in their mediati<strong>on</strong> processes.<br />

In practice, the distincti<strong>on</strong> between mediati<strong>on</strong>, negotiati<strong>on</strong> and<br />

Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogues is fluid. Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogues may at times<br />

involve bi/multiparty negotiati<strong>on</strong>s and third-party mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

where there is a political deadlock or the breakdown of dialogue.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>cerns to protect nati<strong>on</strong>al sovereignty and preserve nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

ownership of the processes make insider mediators the ideal<br />

bridge-builders and go-betweens to c<strong>on</strong>vene the process, with<br />

external actors present in a purely supporting role.<br />

External assistance<br />

External actors are best suited in their functi<strong>on</strong> as mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

support actors. Mediati<strong>on</strong> support covers a range of activities,<br />

from assistance to professi<strong>on</strong>alisati<strong>on</strong> of the mediati<strong>on</strong> practice.<br />

Broadly speaking, mediati<strong>on</strong> support services include:<br />

1. Technical and operati<strong>on</strong>al support for peace processes (e. g.<br />

advice <strong>on</strong> thematic issues, c<strong>on</strong>flict analysis support, technical<br />

process design questi<strong>on</strong>s, and mediati<strong>on</strong> strategy development);<br />


Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support<br />

2. Capacity-building (e. g. coaching for mediators, training for<br />

mediati<strong>on</strong> teams and c<strong>on</strong>flict parties <strong>on</strong> negotiati<strong>on</strong>/dialogue<br />

skills and topics);<br />

3. Research and knowledge management (e. g. knowledge products<br />

such as fact sheets, manuals, handbooks <strong>on</strong> process design<br />

opti<strong>on</strong>s, legality and wording of c<strong>on</strong>tracts and agreements, developing<br />

a repository of knowledge <strong>on</strong> less<strong>on</strong>s learned and good<br />

practice).<br />

For example …<br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> assists the citizens of HirShabelle<br />

State in Somalia to build or restore c<strong>on</strong>structive relati<strong>on</strong>ships<br />

with each other. We take the knowledge base and experience<br />

present in the communities and add practical skills in mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

and dialogue facilitati<strong>on</strong> through training and joint learning<br />

with important stakeholders and chosen multipliers.<br />

The bulk of the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s work in the area of mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

is related to mediati<strong>on</strong> support.<br />

The practice of mediati<strong>on</strong> has come a l<strong>on</strong>g way since the 1960s<br />

and 70s from a craft mastered by a few senior special envoys<br />

and (former) heads of state. Specialised mediati<strong>on</strong> units now<br />

exist within regi<strong>on</strong>al organisati<strong>on</strong>s, foreign ministries and n<strong>on</strong>governmental<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong>s. This professi<strong>on</strong>alisati<strong>on</strong> of the<br />

field has led to the belief that formal mediati<strong>on</strong> processes can be<br />

managed well if the mediators have the technical capacity (such<br />

as communicati<strong>on</strong> microskills, for example asking meaningful<br />

questi<strong>on</strong>s, c<strong>on</strong>flict analysis expertise and knowledge of process<br />

design) to steer the process. Often the human dimensi<strong>on</strong> – empathy,<br />

intuiti<strong>on</strong>, creativity, the ability to build trust, cultural sensitivity,<br />

and humanity – is undervalued (→ Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>).<br />

Yet these intangible factors sometimes determine the success or<br />


Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support<br />

failure of a mediati<strong>on</strong> process. In the end, both the science and<br />

the art of mediati<strong>on</strong> matter.<br />

While mediati<strong>on</strong> is definitely the more cost-effective way to resolve<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flicts when compared to military interventi<strong>on</strong>, it is<br />

also true that many peace agreements collapse during the early<br />

stages. Further research is needed to determine the effectiveness<br />

of mediati<strong>on</strong> al<strong>on</strong>gside other more coercive peacemaking efforts<br />

such as the use of sancti<strong>on</strong>s, threats of war crimes prosecuti<strong>on</strong><br />

or the use of military force. We have to ask which styles of mediati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

and in combinati<strong>on</strong> with which other measures, are most<br />

effective. There is currently little guidance <strong>on</strong> how to decide the<br />

balance between political sensitivity, inclusivity and transparency;<br />

moreover, the extent to which mediators can be held accountable<br />

for such decisi<strong>on</strong>s and the c<strong>on</strong>sequences that ensue<br />

from them is still unclear.<br />

Questi<strong>on</strong>s related to when mediati<strong>on</strong> is appropriate, what the<br />

limitati<strong>on</strong>s of mediati<strong>on</strong> are, and how to assess the effectiveness<br />

of mediati<strong>on</strong>, have yet to be answered. Today’s multi-layered<br />

and complex c<strong>on</strong>flicts need multi-layered complex third-party<br />

resp<strong>on</strong>ses that draw <strong>on</strong> the experience, strengths and added<br />

value of the various mediati<strong>on</strong> actors <strong>on</strong> each of the tracks. In<br />

some c<strong>on</strong>texts, c<strong>on</strong>flicts have c<strong>on</strong>tinued despite many decades<br />

of peacemaking attempts (Israel-Palestine, Cyprus, etc.)<br />

or have proven resilient to any settlement. Mediati<strong>on</strong>, Nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

Dialogues and mediati<strong>on</strong> support are no silver bullets for solving<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict in isolati<strong>on</strong> but need to be complemented by other<br />

tools and approaches to nurture the culture of dialogue, trust and<br />

c<strong>on</strong>fidence-building am<strong>on</strong>g the belligerents. This requires l<strong>on</strong>gterm<br />

commitment, resources, experience, innovative thinking<br />

and persistence by mediators and those who support the process.<br />


Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Paul Dziatkowiec (2017). The Inside Story: The Impact of Insider Mediators <strong>on</strong><br />

Modern Peacemaking. Geneva: Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue.<br />

Joseph P. Folger, R. A.B. Bush & D. Della Noce (eds.) (2010). Transformative Mediati<strong>on</strong>:<br />

A Sourcebook — Resources for C<strong>on</strong>flict Interventi<strong>on</strong> Practiti<strong>on</strong>ers and<br />

Programs. Institute for the Study of C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong> and Associati<strong>on</strong><br />

for C<strong>on</strong>flict Resoluti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Stine Lehmann-Larsen (2014). Effectively Supporting Mediati<strong>on</strong> – Developments,<br />

Challenges and Requirements. Oslo Forum Papers N°003.<br />

Christina Stenner (2017). The Instituti<strong>on</strong>alizati<strong>on</strong> of Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support: Are Mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

Support Entities there yet? Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

United Nati<strong>on</strong>s and World Bank (2018). Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches<br />

to Preventing Violent C<strong>on</strong>flict. Executive Summary. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: World<br />

Bank.<br />

Online Resources<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, Somalia Project, https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/nc/<br />

en/programmes/africa/somalia-rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong>-and-mediati<strong>on</strong>-support<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, Featured Topic: Multipartiality, https://www.berghoffoundati<strong>on</strong>.org/nc/en/featured-topics/multipartiality/<br />

Uppsala C<strong>on</strong>flict Data Program (2017). UCDP C<strong>on</strong>flict Encyclopaedia. Uppsala<br />

University. www.ucdp.uu.se<br />


Preventing Violence<br />

16 Preventing Violence<br />

Astrid Fischer and Engjellushe Morina<br />

“The more we sweat in peace, the less we bleed in war.”<br />

Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit<br />

Violence preventi<strong>on</strong> has become an integral element of almost<br />

every peacebuilding document, placing it high <strong>on</strong> the internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

agenda. In the c<strong>on</strong>text of c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, violence<br />

includes much more than the use of physical force by pers<strong>on</strong>s<br />

to commit destructive acts against others’ physical or psychological<br />

integrity or property. Structural c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s such as unjust<br />

and oppressive political systems, social inequality or malnutriti<strong>on</strong>,<br />

as well as their cultural or ideological justificati<strong>on</strong>s, are further,<br />

often overlooked, major sources of violence and war (see<br />

also → Addressing Social Grievances). Since violence is caused<br />

by multiple factors, preventi<strong>on</strong> measures should not focus<br />


Preventing Violence<br />

VIOLENCE PREVENTION | acknowledges the issues at stake in<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict, yet implements short-term to l<strong>on</strong>g-term measures offering<br />

alternatives to direct, structural and cultural violence and limiting<br />

the use of force, often in places seen as particularly vulnerable.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> and peacebuilding strive to integrate<br />

a preventative mindset already in the early stages of c<strong>on</strong>flicts<br />

and highlight the important role of educating for n<strong>on</strong>-violence.<br />

merely <strong>on</strong> the perpetrator and the victim of violence but involve<br />

the whole envir<strong>on</strong>ment affecting them – the relevant causes and<br />

drivers, the systemic c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong>s as well as the sometimes hidden<br />

implicati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

Dimensi<strong>on</strong>s of violence preventi<strong>on</strong>: an array of approaches<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict may be a necessary – even formative – part of human existence,<br />

but we can avoid c<strong>on</strong>flict turning into violence. With violence<br />

understood in a broad sense, the task of violence preventi<strong>on</strong><br />

necessarily becomes multi-faceted, involving many fields<br />

and actors. While preventi<strong>on</strong> should ideally be undertaken proactively<br />

and early <strong>on</strong>, attenti<strong>on</strong> often <strong>on</strong>ly focuses <strong>on</strong> a c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

after violence has occurred. For example, peacebuilding efforts<br />

in post-war settings often prioritise preventi<strong>on</strong>, in order to counter<br />

or pre-empt a renewed outbreak of fighting, or to safeguard<br />

sensitive de-escalati<strong>on</strong> processes during transiti<strong>on</strong> phases. Typical<br />

tools and methods include early warning, c<strong>on</strong>fidence- and<br />

security-building measures, preventive diplomacy and peacekeeping,<br />

and peace educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

The preventi<strong>on</strong> of violence is a key resp<strong>on</strong>sibility of any nati<strong>on</strong>-state,<br />

for it bears the exclusive right to the legitimate use<br />

of force within its borders. It is the resp<strong>on</strong>sibility of states and<br />

their authorities to provide all necessary legislati<strong>on</strong>, instituti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

and strategies to prevent violent attacks <strong>on</strong> any of their citizens.<br />


Preventing Violence<br />

States also need to deal with root causes of violence (such as discriminati<strong>on</strong><br />

and other grievances). However, state acti<strong>on</strong> al<strong>on</strong>e<br />

is rarely enough. Often, a state’s citizens or (internati<strong>on</strong>al) social<br />

movements must become active in raising public awareness<br />

and advocating a need for change. One example is the anti-gun<br />

protests after the Florida school massacre in 2018: #Neveragain,<br />

#Onemilli<strong>on</strong>march. State authorities remain slow to act <strong>on</strong> more<br />

restrictive gun laws in the US, however.<br />

Preventing direct violence (domestic and internati<strong>on</strong>al)<br />

(Legitimate) law enforcement describes the basic role, usually<br />

of police and other security pers<strong>on</strong>nel, in preventing (further)<br />

violence. Yet this strand of preventi<strong>on</strong> carries a risk of excessively<br />

heavy-handed tactics and resp<strong>on</strong>ses, especially in repressive regimes,<br />

which counter-productively may cause further grievances<br />

and even violence. In every case, a community needs to strike a<br />

balance between its need for security and the rights of its citizens.<br />

Curbing the means of violence: Research suggests that more<br />

guns do not c<strong>on</strong>tribute to more security and peace, but may lead<br />

to more fatal incidents and increase the risks of violent c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

Locally, there are movements to restrict private gun use. Nati<strong>on</strong>ally,<br />

there are campaigns aiming to reduce the availability of<br />

small arms. Globally, there are efforts to strengthen inter nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong>s and regimes to prevent further arms races, proliferati<strong>on</strong><br />

and weap<strong>on</strong>s transfers to c<strong>on</strong>flict z<strong>on</strong>es.<br />

Background knowledge …<br />

Preventi<strong>on</strong> happens at different stages. Primary violence or c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

preventi<strong>on</strong> targets anybody, whereas sec<strong>on</strong>dary preventi<strong>on</strong><br />

strategies focus <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flict and violence potential within a particular<br />

group or individual. Tertiary preventi<strong>on</strong> targets people<br />

who are radicalised or who have been involved in violent acti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

(→ Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics).<br />


Preventing Violence<br />

Strengthening legislati<strong>on</strong>: Most acts of violence are crimes<br />

that are liable to prosecuti<strong>on</strong> as retributi<strong>on</strong> and deterrence.<br />

Much progress has been made under domestic and internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

framework c<strong>on</strong>venti<strong>on</strong>s (e. g. c<strong>on</strong>cerning children’s rights, increasing<br />

criminalisati<strong>on</strong> of sexual violence, and in the burge<strong>on</strong>ing<br />

area of → Dealing with the Past and Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice). Yet<br />

many acts of violence are still legal under internati<strong>on</strong>al humanitarian<br />

law (e. g. the killing of combatants) and the protecti<strong>on</strong> of<br />

civilians in modern warfare remains inadequate.<br />

Preventing structural and cultural violence<br />

Bey<strong>on</strong>d dealing with the symptoms, it is important to address<br />

the root causes that may lead to violent behaviour. Improving<br />

socio-ec<strong>on</strong>omic c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s, fostering human rights and partici-<br />

For example …<br />

In recent years, an additi<strong>on</strong>al area of violence preventi<strong>on</strong> has<br />

been discussed widely: preventing violent extremism. Violent<br />

extremism describes a current form of seemingly uncompromising<br />

political violence. Although it is today usually associated<br />

with certain religious groups, it is by no means c<strong>on</strong>fined to <strong>on</strong>e<br />

group, religi<strong>on</strong> or regi<strong>on</strong>, and it is certainly not new. Those now<br />

justifying violence ‘in the name of …’ as legitimate acti<strong>on</strong> see<br />

themselves as oppressed by structural/cultural violence (e. g.<br />

military interventi<strong>on</strong>s, political-cultural-ec<strong>on</strong>omic dominance<br />

of ‘the West’ or ‘the impertinence’ of liberal societies). In that<br />

ideological rhetoric, fighting ‘evil’ without compromise is the<br />

<strong>on</strong>ly way, even if this may involve brutal acts against civilians. In<br />

several research projects, teams at the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> are<br />

currently exploring whether and how (more) effective preventi<strong>on</strong><br />

of violent extremism can be achieved by focusing <strong>on</strong> local experiences<br />

and group processes of mobilisati<strong>on</strong> and demobilisati<strong>on</strong><br />

(see also → Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics).<br />


Preventing Violence<br />

pati<strong>on</strong>, development and livelihood are the baseline for violence<br />

preventi<strong>on</strong> (→ Fostering Human Security). However, attitudes<br />

and values also need to change.<br />

Diminishing acceptance of violence and promoting a ‘culture of<br />

peace’: In many settings, violence is encouraged by the silence<br />

of the majority or unquesti<strong>on</strong>ed norms. For example, ‘school<br />

yard violence’, such as bullying, is often present in a social setting<br />

where perpetrators feel unchallenged in inflicting harm <strong>on</strong><br />

some<strong>on</strong>e they c<strong>on</strong>sider weaker and not worthy of being part of<br />

a core group. Besides the perpetrator(s) and a victim, there are<br />

other pupils and maybe even teachers who do not intervene. Due<br />

to their behaviour, their lack of acti<strong>on</strong>, the situati<strong>on</strong> may c<strong>on</strong>tinue.<br />

In such a setting, peace educati<strong>on</strong> can be a relevant form<br />

of preventi<strong>on</strong>, especially if raising awareness is combined with<br />

pointing out alternative acti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

Promoting ‘good examples’ of n<strong>on</strong>violent acti<strong>on</strong>: On an individual<br />

and collective level, highlighting alternative ways of protest<br />

and resistance for change is essential (there are many more<br />

examples than Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King). “Peace<br />

Counts <strong>on</strong> Tour”, for instance, is an exhibiti<strong>on</strong> supported by the<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> in cooperati<strong>on</strong> with media reporters who go<br />

to c<strong>on</strong>flict z<strong>on</strong>es to highlight the work of successful c<strong>on</strong>temporary<br />

peacebuilders. The pictures and stories collected are used<br />

to spread positive examples or models of how to build peace and<br />

prevent or counteract violence locally.<br />

Resilience and mobilisati<strong>on</strong> against the ‘logic of violence’:<br />

In an envir<strong>on</strong>ment of escalating c<strong>on</strong>flict, there may be a fierce<br />

struggle between violence-promoting ‘extremists’ and those insisting<br />

<strong>on</strong> peaceful strategies. However, the logic of violent struggle<br />

can also be challenged from within a community. As violent<br />

groups often claim to act <strong>on</strong> behalf of marginalised communities,<br />

they rely <strong>on</strong> the acceptance of their acti<strong>on</strong>s by (at least secti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

of) their community. The dissoluti<strong>on</strong> of the Basque ETA and its<br />

disarmament by civil society actors in 2017 show that groups that<br />


Preventing Violence<br />

used to rely <strong>on</strong> violent tactics may eventually adapt their strategy<br />

due to a loss of public support, moving instead to n<strong>on</strong>-violent<br />

acti<strong>on</strong>. The #MeToo movement highlights another area in which<br />

social mobilisati<strong>on</strong> openly challenged l<strong>on</strong>g-ingrained patterns of<br />

(socially tolerated) sexual violence.<br />

Strengthening norms and instituti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

Another important aim for successful preventi<strong>on</strong> of violence is to<br />

strengthen norms, mobilise political support for preventi<strong>on</strong> and<br />

develop instituti<strong>on</strong>al capacities.<br />

Operati<strong>on</strong>alising norms: Public debate influences the percepti<strong>on</strong><br />

of norms, which may change over time. Public awareness of<br />

sexual violence, for example, has increased tremendously over<br />

recent years. While rape has been used as a weap<strong>on</strong> and war tactic<br />

for centuries, UN Resoluti<strong>on</strong> 1820, codifying a normative shift,<br />

finally recognised this practice as a war crime in 2016.<br />

Developing structures and capacities: Effective structures of<br />

violence preventi<strong>on</strong> have to involve all actors (potential perpetrators,<br />

victims and bystanders), pers<strong>on</strong>s of influence (informal<br />

or formal) and relevant instituti<strong>on</strong>s. As violence is often the result<br />

of dysfuncti<strong>on</strong>al power relati<strong>on</strong>s, preventi<strong>on</strong> strategies may<br />

first have to improve the flexibility of the (political) system so it<br />

is more able to cope with demands and grievances and accommodate<br />

change. In a war-torn society, this may involve political<br />

reforms to enhance power sharing, participati<strong>on</strong> and inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />

(→ Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support; → Participati<strong>on</strong> and Inclusivity),<br />

as well as initiating necessary social or ec<strong>on</strong>omic reforms.<br />

Violence preventi<strong>on</strong> as a joint effort in need of mobilisati<strong>on</strong><br />

In sum, preventi<strong>on</strong> of violence is a political resp<strong>on</strong>sibility as well<br />

as a social challenge. Rules and regulati<strong>on</strong>s can help to set normative<br />

frameworks and create pressure, but social mobilisati<strong>on</strong><br />

remains necessary to c<strong>on</strong>trol the use of power, whether in political,<br />

cultural or social settings. The preventi<strong>on</strong> of violence depends<br />

<strong>on</strong> social awareness, capacity building, adopti<strong>on</strong> of new<br />


Preventing Violence<br />

norms and attitudes, including incentivising n<strong>on</strong>-violence from<br />

an early age, and calling attenti<strong>on</strong> to system(at)ic violent abuse.<br />

It also c<strong>on</strong>tinues to depend <strong>on</strong> the willingness and capacity of<br />

actors at all levels to close the gap between early warning and<br />

acti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Abbas Aroua (2018). Addressing Extremism and Violence: The Importance of<br />

Terminology. Geneva: Cordoba Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Hans J. Giessmann, Janel Galvanek and Christine Seifert (2017). Curbing Violence:<br />

Development, Applicati<strong>on</strong>, and the Sustaining of Nati<strong>on</strong>al Capacities for<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict Preventi<strong>on</strong>. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

GIZ (2018). Factsheet Prevenir Primero: Introducing a systemic approach to violence<br />

preventi<strong>on</strong>. Eschborn.<br />

United Nati<strong>on</strong>s and World Bank (2018). Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches<br />

to Preventing Violent C<strong>on</strong>flict. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: World Bank.<br />

World Health Organizati<strong>on</strong> (2002). World Report <strong>on</strong> Violence and Health. Geneva:<br />

WHO.<br />

Online Resources<br />

Beatrix Austin & Hans J. Giessmann (eds.) (2018). Transformative Approaches to<br />

Violent Extremism. <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook Dialogue Series No. 13. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong>. https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/<br />

Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Handbook/Dialogues/dialogue13_violent_extremism_complete.<br />

pdf<br />

Basque Permanent Social Forum (2017). ETA’s disarmament in the c<strong>on</strong>text of<br />

internati<strong>on</strong>al DDR guidelines. Less<strong>on</strong>s learnt from an innovative Basque<br />

scenario. Transiti<strong>on</strong>s Series No. 12. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> https://<br />

www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Papers/<br />

Transiti<strong>on</strong>s_Series/transiti<strong>on</strong>s12_Basque_II.pdf.<br />

“Preventing Crises, Preventing Atrocities”, Peace Lab Blog, 10 November 2016.<br />

https://peacelab.blog/2016/11/event-report-preventing-crises-preventingatrocities<br />


Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance<br />

17 Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive<br />

Refugee Assistance<br />

Dagmar Nolden, Beatrix Austin and Julian Klauke<br />

“We cannot live <strong>on</strong>ly for ourselves. … our acti<strong>on</strong>s run as causes,<br />

and they come back to us as effects.”<br />

Herman Melville<br />

Imagine that in your hometown, several volunteers have organised<br />

an afterno<strong>on</strong> event for refugees who have been arriving<br />

from Afghanistan and Syria. The volunteers have been baking all<br />

morning, decorating the assembly room of the Catholic Church<br />

and are getting excited about introducing the new arrivals to<br />

their traditi<strong>on</strong>s. One of them has even made a poster inviting the<br />

refugees to the afterno<strong>on</strong> with the address and exact time in German<br />

– this has been put up in the gym where most of the re fugees<br />


Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance<br />

CONFLICT SENSITIVITY | the ability to understand the c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

<strong>on</strong>e is operating in, to understand the interacti<strong>on</strong> between own<br />

acti<strong>on</strong>s and the c<strong>on</strong>flict, and to use this understanding to avoid<br />

negative impacts and maximise positive impacts <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

REFUGEE | some<strong>on</strong>e who has been forced to flee his or her country<br />

because of persecuti<strong>on</strong>, war or violence.<br />

are staying. The time comes, but <strong>on</strong>ly a few people slowly trickle<br />

in. To the volunteers’ disappointment, the guests’ enthusiasm<br />

remains rather low.<br />

Does this sound familiar? It is a perfect example of a well-intended<br />

initiative that did not turn out as expected. This is how we<br />

could make it better: Together with the refugees, the volunteers<br />

meet to discuss ideas of how together they could make the new<br />

arrivals and the people in the town feel more c<strong>on</strong>nected. Jointly,<br />

they decide to use the next sunny weekend for a get-together in<br />

the park. Every<strong>on</strong>e can bring food or drinks typical of their home<br />

country and tell each other <strong>on</strong>e remarkable story about the place<br />

they come from. An invitati<strong>on</strong> in several languages will be put up<br />

across town, in shops and at the gym.<br />

Derived from daily practice of actual hands-<strong>on</strong> refugee assistance<br />

in Germany, these two examples are almost of textbook character<br />

when it comes to visualising the relevance of c<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity<br />

in the c<strong>on</strong>text of displacement, migrati<strong>on</strong> and refugee assistance.<br />

What is c<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity?<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity is the ability, for example of an organisati<strong>on</strong> to<br />

understand the c<strong>on</strong>flict it is operating in, and to understand the<br />

interacti<strong>on</strong> between its own operati<strong>on</strong>s and the c<strong>on</strong>flict, and to<br />

use this understanding to avoid negative impacts and maximise<br />

positive impacts <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>flict. It requires a solid c<strong>on</strong>flict analysis.<br />


Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive approaches were originally developed for work<br />

in c<strong>on</strong>flict regi<strong>on</strong>s, yet are relevant to all activities relating to<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict, including refugee assistance. C<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive initiatives<br />

ensure, for example, that they do not inadvertently create<br />

new or increase existing socio-political tensi<strong>on</strong>s but strengthen<br />

social cohesi<strong>on</strong>. In situati<strong>on</strong>s where there is a high risk that wellintended<br />

acti<strong>on</strong>s will result in mispercepti<strong>on</strong>s, frustrati<strong>on</strong>s and<br />

might even reproduce or perpetuate discriminating structures –<br />

which could in turn culminate in the use of violence – c<strong>on</strong>flictsensitive<br />

approaches can make a huge difference, as the example<br />

at the beginning illustrates.<br />

“Do no harm” is <strong>on</strong>e of the best-known principles in this area<br />

and has become a core tool for project planning, m<strong>on</strong>itoring<br />

and evaluati<strong>on</strong> (e. g. CDA 2016 and others; see also → Learning<br />

Together). It seeks to analyse how an interventi<strong>on</strong> may be<br />

implemented in a way that supports local communities in addressing<br />

the underlying causes of c<strong>on</strong>flict rather than exacerbating<br />

the c<strong>on</strong>flict. C<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity approaches go bey<strong>on</strong>d do no<br />

harm. Today, governmental and n<strong>on</strong>governmental actors alike<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive refugee assistance as c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> and peacebuilding<br />

War<br />

Violence<br />

Increasing violence<br />

Direct, cultural, structural violence<br />

Figure 8, source: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />


Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance<br />

increasingly recognise the need for c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive approaches<br />

to development, humanitarian assistance and peacebuilding to<br />

strengthen the c<strong>on</strong>textual understanding of actors and their settings.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity is now well-established in the fields of<br />

educati<strong>on</strong> and journalism.<br />

Nevertheless, c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive approaches have yet to be incorporated<br />

and mainstreamed bey<strong>on</strong>d situati<strong>on</strong>s of fragility and<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict despite their potential in other areas. A glance at the literature<br />

suggests that the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> is am<strong>on</strong>g the few<br />

organisati<strong>on</strong>s that apply the c<strong>on</strong>cept to the field of professi<strong>on</strong>al<br />

and voluntary refugee assistance in Germany.<br />

How to apply c<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity to refugee assistance abroad<br />

As in any other space of human interacti<strong>on</strong>, in c<strong>on</strong>texts where<br />

refugees and “locals” meet, c<strong>on</strong>flict may arise. C<strong>on</strong>flict may also<br />

arise for refugees from many different backgrounds meeting in<br />

precarious c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s. While many people understand c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

as a normal occurrence, they often find it exhausting to expe-<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive refugee assistance<br />

Increasing justice<br />

Cooperati<strong>on</strong>, Integrati<strong>on</strong><br />

Peace<br />

Graph by: Christoph Lang<br />


Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance<br />

rience and deal with it in their daily lives, as c<strong>on</strong>flict indicates<br />

fundamental, yet often unc<strong>on</strong>scious, differences in feelings, understandings<br />

and wants. These differences and their manifold<br />

causes need a productive space. However, refugees and others<br />

have few opportunities to meet as equals (namely as human beings<br />

with dignity and a desire to live a fulfilled life; → Averting<br />

Humiliati<strong>on</strong>). We believe that creating spaces for c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive,<br />

n<strong>on</strong>-discriminatory and trauma-sensitive encounters (e. g.<br />

GIZ 2016) is an important c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong> to peacebuilding (see<br />

Figure 8).<br />

An example of the above-menti<strong>on</strong>ed spaces for encounter are<br />

peace educati<strong>on</strong> workshops <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity in refugee<br />

assistance, as c<strong>on</strong>ceptualised by the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>. They<br />

move bey<strong>on</strong>d transmitting the c<strong>on</strong>cept itself towards providing<br />

input and impetus <strong>on</strong> the three dimensi<strong>on</strong>s of peace educati<strong>on</strong>:<br />

(1) competences, (2) capacities and (3) behaviour. The overall<br />

aim is to c<strong>on</strong>tribute to peoples’ ability to live together peacefully.<br />

(See also → Educating for Peace.)<br />

At the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, we have developed the following ten<br />

propositi<strong>on</strong>s for c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive refugee assistance:<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict is a chance to grow, if we strengthen capacities for<br />

dealing with c<strong>on</strong>flict c<strong>on</strong>structively.<br />

We try to be mindful of our own attitudes towards c<strong>on</strong>flict,<br />

our behaviour in c<strong>on</strong>flict and the (cultural) norms and experiences<br />

that may shape them.<br />

It is important to be aware that any acti<strong>on</strong> can exacerbate<br />

or escalate c<strong>on</strong>flict, but can also foster peaceful coexistence between<br />

people.<br />

We strive to include all interested stakeholders early <strong>on</strong>, following<br />

the principle of multipartiality, and meet each other as equals<br />

while aiming to overcome all forms of discriminati<strong>on</strong> and racism.<br />

We need to be aware of our own needs, wishes, goals and<br />

limitati<strong>on</strong>s in any interacti<strong>on</strong> and reach out to understand the<br />

needs, wishes and goals of our fellow human beings as well as<br />

the specific limitati<strong>on</strong>s they face.<br />


Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance<br />

It is important to understand and critically reflect <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>text<br />

and c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s we come from and currently live in, and the<br />

(historically evolved) power structures and dependencies associated<br />

with them.<br />

It is necessary to develop an understanding of the effects of<br />

psychological trauma in some<strong>on</strong>e’s life and how in turn this may<br />

affect others, e. g. through sec<strong>on</strong>dary traumatisati<strong>on</strong> caused by<br />

memories of the events.<br />

Dedicating time to exploring <strong>on</strong>e’s emoti<strong>on</strong>al resources and<br />

replenishing them <strong>on</strong> a regular basis is essential for <strong>on</strong>e’s capacity<br />

to act in a sensitive and empathetic manner in challenging<br />

circumstances.<br />

The current situati<strong>on</strong> of refugees and their c<strong>on</strong>tinuing arrival<br />

require a change of mindset and changes in behaviour – in the<br />

receiving societies and am<strong>on</strong>g the people arriving.<br />

It is important to acknowledge and learn about the global<br />

c<strong>on</strong>sequences of our own localised acti<strong>on</strong>s, and to begin to act<br />

accordingly.<br />

Following these principles, c<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity raises awareness<br />

of the need of critical (self-)reflecti<strong>on</strong>. It helps to answer the<br />

questi<strong>on</strong>: “Do we really do good when we mean to do good?” In<br />

order to answer this questi<strong>on</strong>, it is important to understand the<br />

(historically evolved) structures and dependencies often underlying<br />

assistance, as it can otherwise reproduce and strengthen<br />

these injustices despite being well-intenti<strong>on</strong>ed. Thomas Gebauer<br />

describes the prevalent discourse: “A world that <strong>on</strong>ly knows<br />

helpers and helped appears a lot more peaceful than a world<br />

split into privileged and humiliated, into might and plight.<br />

Might and plight appal, but who could possibly take offence at<br />

help?” In the c<strong>on</strong>text of c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive refugee assistance, it<br />

is thus important to identify and overcome differences in opportunities<br />

for political and social participati<strong>on</strong> (e. g. access to<br />

the job market), inequalities in living c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s and resource<br />

distributi<strong>on</strong> (e. g. land ownership), and ec<strong>on</strong>omic power, as<br />

well as all forms of discriminati<strong>on</strong> and racism. In that sense,<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity not <strong>on</strong>ly helps to analyse current and past<br />


Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance<br />

situati<strong>on</strong>s in order to better understand the factors underlying<br />

their c<strong>on</strong>flictual dynamics. It also provides a framework and<br />

empowerment to foresee and manage potential future challenges<br />

by encouraging a change of perspectives and real dialogue<br />

with “the other”, be it the beneficiary of assistance or all<br />

other actors in the field.<br />

Dealing with difficulties and dilemmas<br />

Adding c<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity to the already demanding work in<br />

professi<strong>on</strong>al and voluntary refugee assistance can appear to be<br />

a daunting propositi<strong>on</strong>. However, implementati<strong>on</strong> (even if <strong>on</strong>ly<br />

partial) can help to reduce stress <strong>on</strong> all actors as opportunities<br />

within c<strong>on</strong>flicts come to the forefr<strong>on</strong>t and frustrati<strong>on</strong>, coerci<strong>on</strong><br />

and other escalating dynamics can be avoided. The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s experience shows that learning and applying c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

sensitivity is a process that itself includes progress as well<br />

as setbacks.<br />

In public and academic discourse, the role of culture, intercultural<br />

communicati<strong>on</strong> and so-called cultural c<strong>on</strong>flicts are topics<br />

of heated debate. Our c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive approach does acknowledge<br />

differences and similarities between people, in their<br />

socio-cultural backgrounds and in their behaviour in c<strong>on</strong>flicts.<br />

However, attributing c<strong>on</strong>flicts to cultural differences is often an<br />

attempt to find a quick and easy soluti<strong>on</strong> to a difficult situati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Instead of efforts being made to analyse and deal c<strong>on</strong>structively<br />

with the root causes of the c<strong>on</strong>flict, perceived cultural differences<br />

are either brushed away with calls for tolerance or are exploited<br />

to delegitimise the other pers<strong>on</strong> or group.<br />

Many fundamental approaches to managing c<strong>on</strong>flict between<br />

different groups are similar, e. g. dialogue, mediati<strong>on</strong> and negotiati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Training people to become more “literate” in reading<br />

comm<strong>on</strong> situati<strong>on</strong>s and finding more creative ways to deal with<br />

them can help in addressing and resolving some of the root causes<br />

of c<strong>on</strong>flict. Knowledge of cultural particularities is useful in<br />


Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance<br />

this c<strong>on</strong>text, as is any other knowledge about the c<strong>on</strong>flict c<strong>on</strong>text<br />

or parties.<br />

Every<strong>on</strong>e – regardless of their socialisati<strong>on</strong>, circumstances or<br />

legal status – has capacities for c<strong>on</strong>structive c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

which can be developed (further). These capacities, together<br />

with the interdependence of all people provide an ideal<br />

ground for societies to move towards more justice, tolerance, cohesi<strong>on</strong><br />

and, indeed, peace.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Isabella Bauer (2017). Unterbringung v<strong>on</strong> Flüchtlingen in deutschen Kommunen:<br />

K<strong>on</strong>fliktmediati<strong>on</strong> und lokale Beteiligung. State-of-Research Papier 10. B<strong>on</strong>n:<br />

BICC. [in German]<br />

CDA (2016). Do No Harm Workshop Trainer’s Manual. Cambridge, MA: Collaborative<br />

Learning Projects.<br />

Thomas Gebauer (2016). Mit Zäunen gegen Staatszerfall und soziale Ungleichheit?<br />

Fluchtursachen bekämpfen geht anders! Speech in Hannover. [in German]<br />

GIZ (2016). Psychosocial Support in Crisis and C<strong>on</strong>flict Settings. Eschborn: GIZ.<br />

Dagmar Nolden and Cassandra Schützko (2016). C<strong>on</strong>flict Sensitive Refugee Assistance.<br />

Documentati<strong>on</strong> of Project Activities “N<strong>on</strong>violent Educati<strong>on</strong> in Jordan”.<br />

Tübingen: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> Peace Educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Swisspeace (2017). Migrati<strong>on</strong> and Peacebuilding. A Propos Magazine No 153.<br />

Bern: KOFF.<br />

Online Resources<br />

Resources <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flict sensitivity, www.c<strong>on</strong>flictsensitivity.org<br />

INEE, http://www.ineesite.org/en/c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive-educati<strong>on</strong><br />

UNESCO, http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communicati<strong>on</strong>-and-informati<strong>on</strong>/<br />

resources/publicati<strong>on</strong>s-and-communicati<strong>on</strong>-materials/publicati<strong>on</strong>s/full-list/<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict-sensitive-reporting-state-of-the-art-a-course-for-journalists-andjournalism-educators/<br />

k<strong>on</strong>text.flucht [in German], https://www.ida-nrw.de/fileadmin/user_upload/<br />

brosch_flyer/IDA-NRW_Reader_k<strong>on</strong>text.flucht.pdf<br />


Researching C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

18 Researching C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

Vér<strong>on</strong>ique Dudouet and Andreas Schädel<br />

“Research that produces nothing but books will not suffice.”<br />

Kurt Lewin<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flicts are inevitable comp<strong>on</strong>ents of human development<br />

and social change (→ Addressing Social Grievances). Violence<br />

in c<strong>on</strong>flict, however, is not inevitable. C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

research seeks to explore c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s, strategies and policies for<br />

sustaining patterns of n<strong>on</strong>-violent behaviour am<strong>on</strong>g c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

parties, particularly in protracted social and ethnopolitical c<strong>on</strong>flicts.<br />

It aims to support c<strong>on</strong>flict parties in building, restoring<br />

and maintaining c<strong>on</strong>structive, just relati<strong>on</strong>s in order to abolish<br />

the use of force as a means of interacti<strong>on</strong>. In this c<strong>on</strong>text,<br />


Researching C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

PARTICIPATORY (ACTION) RESEARCH | accumulates knowledge<br />

and enhances understanding of how social interacti<strong>on</strong>s functi<strong>on</strong>,<br />

while at the same time intervening in a direct and practical way.<br />

In order to ensure ownership and inclusiveness, it involves the<br />

actors being studied in the process <strong>on</strong> an <strong>on</strong>going basis. In this<br />

sense, it is particularly well suited to the endeavour of c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flicts and their management should not be looked up<strong>on</strong> as<br />

simplistic linear phenomena that start, escalate and stop for all<br />

actors and all sectors in the same way (→ Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Dynamics). The interdependent and systemic dimensi<strong>on</strong>s, as<br />

well as the dynamic nature of c<strong>on</strong>flict therefore need to be more<br />

fully understood.<br />

Research and practice informing each other<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> research does not encompass a grand<br />

theory, but generates theory elements from field research and<br />

from close interacti<strong>on</strong> with practiti<strong>on</strong>ers and the c<strong>on</strong>flicting parties<br />

themselves. Nevertheless, it is theory-guided. Of particular<br />

importance is theorising that addresses the differences between<br />

inter-pers<strong>on</strong>al and inter-group → C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>, and<br />

between symmetrical and asymmetrical c<strong>on</strong>flicts. Moreover,<br />

research <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> incorporates knowledge of<br />

various disciplines (political science, sociology and social psychology,<br />

history, anthropology, ethnology, law, communicati<strong>on</strong>,<br />

educati<strong>on</strong> and more).<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> research can be c<strong>on</strong>sidered a specific<br />

strand of peace and c<strong>on</strong>flict research which pays particular attenti<strong>on</strong><br />

to bringing about supportive c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s for practical progress<br />

in peacemaking and peacebuilding. It starts from the premise<br />

that c<strong>on</strong>cepts and theory must evolve in a c<strong>on</strong>tinuous, reflec-<br />


Researching C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

tive and critical exchange with practice, which involves putting<br />

c<strong>on</strong>cepts to the test in practical settings and debating their validity<br />

with practiti<strong>on</strong>ers from many backgrounds and in many<br />

localities. Str<strong>on</strong>g links to the field of policy are also required, by<br />

c<strong>on</strong>sulting nati<strong>on</strong>al and internati<strong>on</strong>al decisi<strong>on</strong>-makers during<br />

the research design stage, and feeding the results back to them<br />

in the form of targeted recommendati<strong>on</strong>s. In brief: theoretical<br />

approaches should c<strong>on</strong>tribute to developing new political and<br />

social strategies, and c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> practice should inspire<br />

ideas <strong>on</strong> theory.<br />

Whenever c<strong>on</strong>flicting parties, practiti<strong>on</strong>ers and policy-makers<br />

are involved in research, it is essential to c<strong>on</strong>sider the diversity of<br />

actors’ interests. By bringing the actors to the fore, deeper sociocultural<br />

and behavioural aspects of acti<strong>on</strong> and decisi<strong>on</strong>-making<br />

can be explored in the c<strong>on</strong>text of change. Following this methodology,<br />

the research agenda is influenced and shaped increasingly<br />

by those who are immediately affected by its results. The<br />

growing interest of practiti<strong>on</strong>ers in becoming involved in inclusive<br />

patterns of research has begun to narrow the gap by rec<strong>on</strong>ciling<br />

the communities of research and practice, by motivating<br />

both towards collective learning and by encouraging researchers<br />

to collaborate with practiti<strong>on</strong>ers to create reflective feedback<br />

loops. Collaborative research in joint teams, aimed at supporting<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>, increases the knowledge of how different<br />

actors, processes and structures c<strong>on</strong>tribute (or not) to peacebuilding<br />

processes. The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>siders inclusive,<br />

bottom-up, participatory and reflective methods of research – of<br />

which acti<strong>on</strong> research elements are an important part – a great<br />

opportunity for generating the knowledge and support necessary<br />

for sustained c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Acti<strong>on</strong> research: participatory, inclusive and change-oriented<br />

Acti<strong>on</strong> research can be useful in this c<strong>on</strong>text as <strong>on</strong>e of several research<br />

methods. The first projects evolved in the 1970s, mainly in<br />

the university sector and in work with marginalised groups and<br />


Researching C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

urban districts, but also in community projects in Latin America,<br />

most often led by social psychologists. The purpose of acti<strong>on</strong> research<br />

is to undertake studies into the c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s and impacts of<br />

various forms of social acti<strong>on</strong>. It also aspires to influence social<br />

acti<strong>on</strong>; in other words, it is normative in focus. Its agenda c<strong>on</strong>centrates<br />

<strong>on</strong> specific social grievances.<br />

The main objective of the research is not to test theoretical hypotheses<br />

but to bring about practical change in the problematic<br />

situati<strong>on</strong> which is the subject of study. This is viewed as a holistic<br />

social process: individual variables are not isolated and collected<br />

as “objective data”; instead, data collecti<strong>on</strong> itself is interpreted<br />

as part of the social process. Acti<strong>on</strong> research involves the<br />

use of qualitative approaches based <strong>on</strong> empirical social research,<br />

including the evaluati<strong>on</strong> of project reports, participatory m<strong>on</strong>itoring,<br />

individual or group interviews with project participants<br />

and members of the target groups, and surveys, but also ethnographic<br />

methods and creative forms of investigati<strong>on</strong> such as theatre.<br />

The methods aim to exert direct influence <strong>on</strong> events within<br />

society. The researcher temporarily aband<strong>on</strong>s his or her distance<br />

to the research object and is intensively involved, during certain<br />

phases, in the process being studied. The subjects being observed<br />

and studied are not cast in a passive role but participate<br />

actively in the debate about objectives and in data collecti<strong>on</strong> and<br />

evaluati<strong>on</strong>. For the researchers, a precise definiti<strong>on</strong> of roles and<br />

<strong>on</strong>going self-reflecti<strong>on</strong> are essential.<br />

Acti<strong>on</strong> research therefore not <strong>on</strong>ly attempts to accumulate knowledge<br />

and enhance understanding of how social interacti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

functi<strong>on</strong>; it intervenes in a direct and practical way. In order to<br />

ensure ownership and inclusiveness, it involves the actors being<br />

studied in the process <strong>on</strong> an <strong>on</strong>going basis. Academic findings<br />

are thus translated into practice, and research c<strong>on</strong>cepts and theoretical<br />

c<strong>on</strong>structs are subjected to practical testing at the same<br />

time. The c<strong>on</strong>tinuous feedback of results to project participants,<br />

through workshops and discussi<strong>on</strong> of interim and final reports,<br />

is essential. Designed for a l<strong>on</strong>ger timeframe, acti<strong>on</strong> research<br />


Researching C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

The acti<strong>on</strong> research process<br />

Altering<br />

structural<br />

c<strong>on</strong>tradicti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

Peace<br />

building<br />

Improving<br />

relati<strong>on</strong>s of<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

parties<br />

Changing<br />

individual attitudes<br />

and behaviour<br />

Graph by: Christoph Lang<br />

Figure 9, source: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

can provide valuable informati<strong>on</strong> about the opportunities for,<br />

and limits to, peacebuilding strategies. For instance, the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong> trains female ex-combatants in four countries to collect<br />

video testim<strong>on</strong>ies from their peers in order to document and<br />

analyse the challenges and opportunities faced by female members<br />

of armed movements in the wake of post-war political transiti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

This knowledge produced by insider experts will then be<br />

integrated into training and capacity-building programmes for<br />

resistance and liberati<strong>on</strong> movements and shared with internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

peacebuilding agencies.<br />


Researching C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

Practical needs determine appropriate research methods<br />

It is certainly true that not every peacebuilding measure can be<br />

accompanied by a comprehensive research project, as in most<br />

cases those who fund peace practice will finance short-term<br />

evaluati<strong>on</strong>s at best. Nor can acti<strong>on</strong> research be c<strong>on</strong>sidered the<br />

<strong>on</strong>e and <strong>on</strong>ly approach or method – in partnership with others,<br />

the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> implements a multi-method approach<br />

integrating qualitative, quantitative and experimental methods.<br />

As described above, substantial acti<strong>on</strong> research requires l<strong>on</strong>gterm<br />

field research, which does not usually corresp<strong>on</strong>d with the<br />

budgets and funding lines of academic (or other) d<strong>on</strong>or agencies.<br />

Furthermore, not all practical engagement lends itself to being<br />

the object of research, especially given the discreet c<strong>on</strong>fidential<br />

settings required for effective peace processes. Nevertheless, in<br />

order to improve knowledge of peace practice, the underlying<br />

ideas of acti<strong>on</strong> research can help in designing and implementing<br />

projects that aim to support the creati<strong>on</strong> of inclusive structures<br />

and sustained practices of n<strong>on</strong>-violent interacti<strong>on</strong>. These<br />

include, above all: respect towards those who are subjects of the<br />

study, clarificati<strong>on</strong> of the roles and aims of those who c<strong>on</strong>duct<br />

the research, involvement of the stakeholders in the development<br />

of research questi<strong>on</strong>s and hypotheses, and transparency of<br />

results through the use of feedback loops.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Oliver Ramsbotham, Tom Woodhouse and Hugh Miall (2016). C<strong>on</strong>temporary<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict Resoluti<strong>on</strong>. Fourth, fully updated and revised editi<strong>on</strong>. Cambridge:<br />

Polity Press.<br />

Peter Reas<strong>on</strong> and Hilary Bradbury (eds.) (2006). The SAGE Handbook of Acti<strong>on</strong><br />

Research. L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: Sage.<br />

Peter Schlotter and Sim<strong>on</strong>e Wisotzki (Hrsg.) (2011). Friedens- und K<strong>on</strong>fliktforschung.<br />

Baden-Baden: Nomos.<br />

Elisabeth Wood (2006). The Ethical Challenges of Field Research in C<strong>on</strong>flict Z<strong>on</strong>es.<br />

Qualitative Sociology 29(3), 373–386.<br />

Nigel J. Young (ed.) (2010). The Oxford Internati<strong>on</strong>al Encyclopaedia of Peace.<br />

Oxford: University Press.<br />


Researching C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

Online Resources<br />

Life & Peace Institute (2016). Participatory Acti<strong>on</strong> Research (PAR) as a tool for<br />

transforming c<strong>on</strong>flict. A case study from south central Somalia. Uppsala: Life<br />

& Peace Institute. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/<br />

Somalia_PAR_WEB.pdf<br />

Louis Kriesberg (2011). The State of the Art in C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>, in: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Handbook for C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>on</strong>line editi<strong>on</strong>. https://www.berghoffoundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Handbook/Articles/<br />

kriesberg_handbook.pdf<br />

Martina Fischer (2009). Participatory Evaluati<strong>on</strong> and Critical Peace Research:<br />

A Prec<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> for Peacebuilding, in: Beatrix Schmelzle and Martina Fischer<br />

(eds.) Peacebuilding at a Crossroads? Dilemmas and Paths for Another<br />

Generati<strong>on</strong>. <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook Dialogue Series No. 7. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Research Center for C<strong>on</strong>structive C<strong>on</strong>flict Management. https://www.berghoffoundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Handbook/Dialogue_<br />

Chapters/dialogue7_fischer_comm.pdf<br />


Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

19 Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Nina Bernarding and Beatrix Austin<br />

“It is possible to solve a c<strong>on</strong>flict and not change much …”<br />

John Paul Lederach<br />

In the face of violent c<strong>on</strong>flict, there are three main impulses. The<br />

first is immediate: to stop it. The sec<strong>on</strong>d is a medium- term <strong>on</strong>e<br />

and focuses <strong>on</strong> dealing with the wounds resulting from the violence.<br />

The third, a l<strong>on</strong>g-term <strong>on</strong>e, is to change the underlying<br />

c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s that have led, and may lead again, to violence. We understand<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> as a comprehensive approach<br />

that attempts to achieve the last of these three goals, without<br />

neglecting the others.<br />

There is a c<strong>on</strong>siderable range of approaches to working <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

At the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> was chosen as<br />


Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

CONFLICT TRANSFORMATION | a complex process of c<strong>on</strong>structively<br />

changing relati<strong>on</strong>ships, attitudes, behaviours, interests<br />

and discourses in violence-pr<strong>on</strong>e c<strong>on</strong>flict settings. Importantly,<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> addresses and changes underlying structures,<br />

cultures and instituti<strong>on</strong>s that encourage and c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> violent<br />

political and social c<strong>on</strong>flict over the l<strong>on</strong>g term.<br />

a guiding principle because it is seen as the most deep-reaching<br />

and holistic c<strong>on</strong>ceptualisati<strong>on</strong> of the c<strong>on</strong>structive changes needed<br />

to build a l<strong>on</strong>g-lasting peace that is perceived as just.<br />

The c<strong>on</strong>cept of transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

We define c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> as a complex process of c<strong>on</strong>structively<br />

changing relati<strong>on</strong>ships, attitudes, behaviours, interests<br />

and discourses in violence-pr<strong>on</strong>e c<strong>on</strong>flict settings. Importantly,<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> addresses and changes underlying<br />

structures, cultures and instituti<strong>on</strong>s that encourage and<br />

On terminology …<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> is often c<strong>on</strong>trasted with several other approaches:<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict management (activities undertaken to limit,<br />

mitigate and c<strong>on</strong>tain open c<strong>on</strong>flict), c<strong>on</strong>flict resoluti<strong>on</strong> (activities<br />

undertaken over the short term and medium term dealing with,<br />

and aiming at overcoming, the deep-rooted causes of c<strong>on</strong>flict, including<br />

the structural, behavioural, or attitudinal aspects of the<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict), and c<strong>on</strong>flict settlement (achievement of an agreement<br />

between the c<strong>on</strong>flict parties <strong>on</strong> a political level which enables<br />

them to end an armed c<strong>on</strong>flict). Proactive preventi<strong>on</strong> of violent<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict is also an important aspect of the c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

repertoire (→ Preventing Violence).<br />


Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> violent political and social c<strong>on</strong>flict. The term is used<br />

in the works of several “founding figures” in peace and c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

studies (am<strong>on</strong>g them Adam Curle, Johan Galtung, Louis Kriesberg,<br />

Kumar Rupesinghe and Raimo Väyrynen), but it has been<br />

elaborated most specifically in the works of John Paul Lederach<br />

and Diana Francis.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> is a n<strong>on</strong>-linear and unpredictable process,<br />

involving many different actors in moving from “latent and<br />

overt violence to structural and cultural peace” (Dudouet 2006).<br />

This l<strong>on</strong>g-term process requires transformative changes <strong>on</strong> many<br />

levels and dimensi<strong>on</strong>s, as outlined in the table overleaf:<br />

What does this mean in practical terms? Take, for example, Kenya<br />

and the violence and political crisis it experienced in the wake of<br />

c<strong>on</strong>tested general electi<strong>on</strong>s in 2007/2008. On the <strong>on</strong>e hand, the<br />

Kenyan Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue and Rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> Process, initiated<br />

by the African Uni<strong>on</strong>, was tasked to take immediate measures to<br />

stop the violence. On the other hand, the mandate also included<br />

rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> and social justice issues in the medium term and<br />

c<strong>on</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong>al, legal and instituti<strong>on</strong>al reform in the l<strong>on</strong>g run to<br />

address the root causes. And while initially the process focused<br />

<strong>on</strong> the ruling and oppositi<strong>on</strong> parties, it later included people at<br />

the local and community level as well. (The 2017 flares of electi<strong>on</strong><br />

violence in the country, however, also remind us that transformative<br />

change is rarely quick or all-encompassing. It needs<br />

to be defended and re-asserted, and result in change that shifts<br />

citizens’ trust in their instituti<strong>on</strong>s.)<br />

Third-party engagement<br />

While in any violent c<strong>on</strong>flict-setting there are people committing<br />

violence and others benefiting from the c<strong>on</strong>flict, we also always<br />

find people working towards peace and peaceful change from<br />

within society – the agents of peaceful transformati<strong>on</strong>. They are<br />

able to embrace <strong>on</strong>e of the central principles of c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>:<br />

that c<strong>on</strong>flict is not a bad thing in itself; indeed, it is often<br />


Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

1. C<strong>on</strong>text<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

2. Structure<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

3. Actor<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

4. Issue<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

5. Pers<strong>on</strong>al/elite<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

in the internati<strong>on</strong>al or regi<strong>on</strong>al<br />

envir<strong>on</strong>ment<br />

from asymmetric to symmetric<br />

relati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

in power structures<br />

of markets of violence and civil<br />

war ec<strong>on</strong>omies (in c<strong>on</strong>flicts<br />

dominated by ec<strong>on</strong>omic motives<br />

of material profit)<br />

of leadership<br />

of goals<br />

inside the political parties<br />

in transcendence of c<strong>on</strong>tested issues<br />

towards c<strong>on</strong>structive compromisis<br />

of issues (policies)<br />

of perspective<br />

of heart<br />

of will<br />

Table 3, source: Hugh Miall, 2004<br />

a driver of necessary change. It is the violence in waging c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

that brings harm.<br />

External experts, such as policy-makers, researchers and n<strong>on</strong>governmental<br />

workers, can support these agents of change, e. g.<br />

by c<strong>on</strong>necting them, or offering ideas, expertise or negotiati<strong>on</strong><br />


Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

support. However, external engagers should not <strong>on</strong>ly support<br />

the agents of peaceful transformati<strong>on</strong>. They also need to understand<br />

the motivati<strong>on</strong>s of the so-called “spoilers”. As Dekha<br />

Ibrahim Abdi puts it when referring to the violent acti<strong>on</strong>s of the<br />

youth in Kenya: “You d<strong>on</strong>’t see them as a problem, but you see<br />

them as people needing to be understood […] and then they become<br />

part of the strategy development.”<br />

Moreover, it has become clear that c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> efforts<br />

need to encompass many levels, tracks and sectors: governments<br />

and n<strong>on</strong>-state actors; women and men; youth; c<strong>on</strong>flict parties<br />

and peace envoys; and representatives of diaspora and business.<br />

External engagement can play an important role in supporting<br />

and c<strong>on</strong>necting the different actors and levels.<br />

The engagement of external actors rests <strong>on</strong> specific principles,<br />

which form a code of c<strong>on</strong>duct. One important set of principles<br />

describes the respect for local capacities and ownership, inclusivity<br />

and multipartiality of processes, and fair play. A sec<strong>on</strong>d set<br />

describes the pers<strong>on</strong>al qualities that are needed in engagement<br />

for c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> and peacebuilding: empathy, humility,<br />

self-reflecti<strong>on</strong>, and the tenacity and perseverance to achieve<br />

incremental change over the l<strong>on</strong>g run, often in the face of serious<br />

setbacks.<br />

Systemic c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

Systemic approaches to c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> have been explored<br />

under different “labels”: some call this type of work holistic,<br />

some multidimensi<strong>on</strong>al. Building <strong>on</strong> family therapy and<br />

systems analysis, at the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, we have chosen the<br />

term “systemic” to describe a particular and important set of approaches<br />

to managing the complexity and challenges of c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> engagement. Its basic principles (developed by<br />

Daniela Körppen and Norbert Ropers, am<strong>on</strong>g others) are:<br />

thinking in network structures<br />

thinking in dynamic frames and in terms of relati<strong>on</strong>ships<br />


Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

emphasising soluti<strong>on</strong>s which already exist within the (c<strong>on</strong>flict)<br />

system rather than just focusing <strong>on</strong> identifying problems<br />

accepting ambivalence and c<strong>on</strong>tingency as well as acknowledging<br />

perspective dependency<br />

c<strong>on</strong>centrating <strong>on</strong> human beings and their learning processes<br />

These principles translate into practical mindsets, attitudes and<br />

procedures: working closely with key stakeholders, mobilising<br />

key agents of peaceful and creative change, putting an emphasis<br />

<strong>on</strong> system-wide c<strong>on</strong>flict analysis and c<strong>on</strong>flict m<strong>on</strong>itoring, investing<br />

in strategic planning of systemic interventi<strong>on</strong>s and pursuing<br />

creativity in soluti<strong>on</strong>s. Any systemic engagement is an <strong>on</strong>going<br />

cycle. First, there is observati<strong>on</strong>, which has to be l<strong>on</strong>ger-term<br />

and include a change of perspectives. Then follows work with<br />

and within the c<strong>on</strong>flict/c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> system, which<br />

leads to change and the evoluti<strong>on</strong> of all involved. This, in turn,<br />

requires renewed observati<strong>on</strong> to reflect <strong>on</strong> theories of change<br />

and impacts observed, but importantly also <strong>on</strong> mistakes made<br />

and misunderstandings that have arisen (See Figure 10, see also<br />

→ Learning Together). Any interventi<strong>on</strong> should in this way focus<br />

<strong>on</strong> the complexity of the c<strong>on</strong>flict system and embrace both internal<br />

and external factors and actors.<br />

Critique and open questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> is not without its challenges and critics.<br />

It calls, some will argue, for such wide-ranging and deepreaching<br />

change in the social fabric that it seems far-fetched or<br />

naïve. Some argue that it may actually intensify c<strong>on</strong>flict in the<br />

short run by proposing a disturbing process of change which<br />

touches (and threatens) beliefs, relati<strong>on</strong>ships, power, positi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

and status. Some claim that it can <strong>on</strong>ly be a guiding noti<strong>on</strong>, a<br />

distant visi<strong>on</strong>, rather than a fully implemented programme. But<br />

the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> believes it is vital for achieving sustainable<br />

peace that lasts generati<strong>on</strong>s. In any case, (systemic) c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

transformati<strong>on</strong> cannot be planned and implemented by <strong>on</strong>e<br />

actor al<strong>on</strong>e – it takes many different c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong>s. How these<br />


Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong>s can be elicited, c<strong>on</strong>nected and made to add up to<br />

“peace writ large” is a serious challenge. Currently, the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong> is exploring scenario planning and process design<br />

as <strong>on</strong>e inclusive, creative and tangible approach (Bojer 2018). An<br />

important area of improvement highlighted in the evaluati<strong>on</strong> of<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> practice is that effective, l<strong>on</strong>g-term work<br />

requires some form of instituti<strong>on</strong>alisati<strong>on</strong> (and resourcing), a<br />

topic discussed often under the heading of Infrastructures for<br />

Peace.<br />

The systemic engagement cycle<br />

1. Observing the system<br />

3. Evolving al<strong>on</strong>g with the system<br />

2. Working with and within the system<br />

Figure 10, source: Barbara Unger and Oliver Wils, 2006<br />


Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Diana Francis (2010). From Pacificati<strong>on</strong> to Peacebuilding: A Call to Global Transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>: Pluto Press.<br />

Daniela Körppen, Norbert Ropers and Hans J. Giessmann (eds.) (2011). The<br />

N<strong>on</strong>-Linearity of Peace Processes – Theory and Practice of Systemic C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Transformati<strong>on</strong>. Opladen/Farmingt<strong>on</strong> Hills: Barbara Budrich Publishers.<br />

John Paul Lederach (2003). The Little Book of C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>. Intercourse,<br />

PA: Good Books.<br />

Audra Mitchell (2011). Lost in Transformati<strong>on</strong>: Violent Peace and Peaceful C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

in Northern Ireland. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK.<br />

Online Resources<br />

Mille Bøjer (2018). Transformative Scenarios Process, in <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook for<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>on</strong>line editi<strong>on</strong>, https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/<br />

fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Handbook/Articles/bojer_handbook.pdf.<br />

Vér<strong>on</strong>ique Dudouet (2006). Transiti<strong>on</strong>s from Violence to Peace: Revisiting Analysis<br />

and Interventi<strong>on</strong> in C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>. <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Report No. 15. Berlin:<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Research Center for C<strong>on</strong>structive C<strong>on</strong>flict Management. https://www.<br />

berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Papers/Reports/<br />

br15e.pdf.<br />

Owen Frazer and Lakhdar Ghettas (2013). C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong> in Practice:<br />

Approaches to C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong> – Less<strong>on</strong>s from Algeria, Denmark,<br />

Egypt, Kenya, Morocco, Tajikistan and Yemen. Geneva: Cordoba New Forum,<br />

http://www.css.ethz.ch/c<strong>on</strong>tent/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/centerfor-securities-studies/pdfs/C<strong>on</strong>flict_Transformati<strong>on</strong>_in_Practice_2013.pdf.<br />

Hugh Miall (2004). C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>: A Multi-Dimensi<strong>on</strong>al Task, in <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Handbook for C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>on</strong>line editi<strong>on</strong>, https://www.berghoffoundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Handbook/Articles/<br />

miall_handbook.pdf.<br />

Barbara Unger and Oliver Wils (2006): Systemic C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>: Guiding<br />

principles for practiti<strong>on</strong>ers and policy makers working <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flict. Berlin:<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> for Peace Support. https://www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/<br />

fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Other_Resources/SCT_Systemic_C<strong>on</strong>flict_<br />

Transformati<strong>on</strong>_Brief.pdf.<br />


Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong> and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

20 Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong> and<br />

Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

Basma Abdelaziz, Karin Göldner-Ebenthal, Lara Azzam<br />

and Cassandra Schützko<br />

“C<strong>on</strong>flict is a necessity for communities when there are diverging<br />

purposes.”<br />

Ibn Khaldun<br />

If we look at c<strong>on</strong>flicts closely, different dynamics, layers, purposes,<br />

stakeholders and interests become visible. In-depth c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

analysis is indispensable for understanding the dynamics<br />

between c<strong>on</strong>flict actors and engaging them in c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

As a USAID c<strong>on</strong>flict assessment framework points out,<br />


Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong> and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

CONFLICT | a perceived incompatibility of interests, needs and<br />

wants between individuals or groups. C<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> regards<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict as a necessary part of (social) change processes,<br />

yet upholds that the means of waging c<strong>on</strong>flict can and should be<br />

n<strong>on</strong>-violent means.<br />

ESCALATION | a process of c<strong>on</strong>flict intensificati<strong>on</strong> usually referring<br />

to a social setting. If left unchecked, it may lead to mutually<br />

destructive or violent behaviour. Accordingly, de-escalati<strong>on</strong> is<br />

a process of c<strong>on</strong>flict mitigati<strong>on</strong> usually referring to a social setting.<br />

Importantly, c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> regards de-escalati<strong>on</strong><br />

as possible in all settings. However, de-escalati<strong>on</strong> rarely just<br />

mirrors escalati<strong>on</strong> in return, as loss of trust often needs careful<br />

repairing.<br />

RADICALISATION | a process of adopting ideologies set apart<br />

from mainstream thinking, sometimes going to the roots or perceived<br />

pure understandings of religi<strong>on</strong> or politics. Often referring<br />

to individuals. Importantly, c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> acknowledges<br />

that radicalism is not necessarily violent or bad. De-radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

is a process of bringing individuals and sometimes groups<br />

back to a more mainstream thinking and ideology.<br />

“armed c<strong>on</strong>flict is driven by key actors in society – individuals,<br />

but also organisati<strong>on</strong>al actors of all sorts – who actively mobilize<br />

people and resources to engage in acts of violence <strong>on</strong> the basis of<br />

grievance, such as a group’s percepti<strong>on</strong> that it has been excluded<br />

from political and ec<strong>on</strong>omic life. Key mobilisers may have different<br />

means and incentives that affect the methods they employ to<br />

achieve their objectives; violence is <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong>e tactic am<strong>on</strong>g many.”<br />

(See also → Addressing Social Grievances.)<br />

Escalati<strong>on</strong> and radicalisati<strong>on</strong> in c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

The dynamics of actors c<strong>on</strong>fr<strong>on</strong>ting each other in (protracted) c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

are usually described as steps towards escalati<strong>on</strong>. In recent<br />


Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong> and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

debates <strong>on</strong> violent extremism, the term radicalisati<strong>on</strong> has also<br />

gained prominence. These two terms have different meanings, although<br />

they are used interchangeably at times, as no comm<strong>on</strong>ly<br />

accepted definiti<strong>on</strong>s exist.<br />

Escalati<strong>on</strong>, as understood by Friedrich Glasl (1999), focuses <strong>on</strong><br />

the dynamics of groups or individuals in a c<strong>on</strong>flict setting (see<br />

Table 4 below). Understanding its stages is key to figuring out the<br />

appropriate time and style of interventi<strong>on</strong> to halt the worsening<br />

of a c<strong>on</strong>flict. Radicalisati<strong>on</strong> is most often understood as an intrapers<strong>on</strong>al<br />

and highly individual process. As such, although by no<br />

means independent of c<strong>on</strong>text, it is not necessarily related to a<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict setting. A large set of push and pull factors have been<br />

identified that influence each pers<strong>on</strong> individually and can – but<br />

do not have to! – lead to radicalisati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

It is important to stress this: radicalisati<strong>on</strong> and escalati<strong>on</strong> can<br />

lead to violence but there is no automatic “stairway”. Rather,<br />

escalati<strong>on</strong> and radicalisati<strong>on</strong> are processes that can stop and<br />

stabilise at any level and point in time or even reverse into de-escalati<strong>on</strong><br />

and de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong>. In current debates around violent<br />

extremism, radicalisati<strong>on</strong> is often used in reference to violence<br />

but there is no c<strong>on</strong>stitutive link between the two (cf. figure 11).<br />

The central role of educati<strong>on</strong><br />

Approaches to influence these dynamics focus either <strong>on</strong> preventing<br />

escalati<strong>on</strong> or radicalisati<strong>on</strong> from starting or intensifying, or<br />

<strong>on</strong> supporting de-escalati<strong>on</strong> and de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong> after they<br />

have happened. The two approaches are not clear-cut. Significant<br />

overlap exists in the work of c<strong>on</strong>flict de-escalati<strong>on</strong>/de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

and violence preventi<strong>on</strong>. Both approaches use dialoguebased<br />

methods that aim to address the existing or potential root<br />

causes of a c<strong>on</strong>flict or a radicalisati<strong>on</strong> process. Understanding<br />

the feelings and motives of actors leading to a particular (violent)<br />

acti<strong>on</strong> or behaviour is at the core of both approaches.<br />


Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong> and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

Radicalisati<strong>on</strong> processes<br />

No automatic stairway of radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

No automatic stairway of de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

• Disintegrati<strong>on</strong><br />

• Discriminiati<strong>on</strong><br />

• Identity c<strong>on</strong>flicts<br />

• Social and<br />

political tensi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

• etc.<br />

• Knowledge<br />

• Authority<br />

• Orientati<strong>on</strong><br />

• Interpretati<strong>on</strong><br />

• etc.<br />

• Online-/offline<br />

community<br />

• Violent/<br />

n<strong>on</strong>violent<br />

• etc.<br />

Reversible radicalisati<strong>on</strong> / de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong> processes<br />

Graph by: Christoph Lang<br />

Figure 11, based <strong>on</strong> P. Neumann<br />

Interventi<strong>on</strong>s can address individuals directly or indirectly via<br />

their communities and instituti<strong>on</strong>s. They can also work simultaneously<br />

<strong>on</strong> the individual and community or instituti<strong>on</strong>al level.<br />

In the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s experience, this is the most effective<br />

way. Some instituti<strong>on</strong>s, for instance religious instituti<strong>on</strong>s, have<br />

a mandate over individuals’ de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong>, such as returned<br />

foreign fighters, as well as over their c<strong>on</strong>stituency as a whole.<br />

Understanding the (c<strong>on</strong>flict) c<strong>on</strong>text, the c<strong>on</strong>flictual issue and<br />

relevant actors is therefore essential for any attempt to influence<br />

actor dynamics and achieve c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />


Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong> and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

One of the main avenues in the l<strong>on</strong>g-term preventi<strong>on</strong> of radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

and violent escalati<strong>on</strong> is quality educati<strong>on</strong>. For example, educati<strong>on</strong><br />

plays a crucial role in strengthening young people’s resilience<br />

by enhancing skills such as reflective and critical thinking,<br />

communicati<strong>on</strong>, and the ability to adopt different perspectives.<br />

These skills help young people to better understand and evaluate<br />

complex situati<strong>on</strong>s, including c<strong>on</strong>flicts. They also support the<br />

identificati<strong>on</strong> of better and workable soluti<strong>on</strong>s. The specific field<br />

of peace educati<strong>on</strong> is critical to our work and aims to strengthen<br />

people’s capacities to deal c<strong>on</strong>structively with various types of<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict. It does so by developing a comprehensive programme<br />

that teaches people how to interact with others and avoid unnecessary<br />

aggressi<strong>on</strong> (see also → Empowerment and Ownership).<br />

Challenges and less<strong>on</strong>s learned in de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong> and<br />

de-escalati<strong>on</strong><br />

Supporting or starting de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong> and de-escalati<strong>on</strong> processes<br />

encounters several hurdles. One of them is often intense<br />

in-group/out-group percepti<strong>on</strong>s that limit access to the group<br />

(or individual) and hence the scope to start any kind of dialogue.<br />

Individuals are often radicalised by peer-to-peer influence and<br />

motivated by group bel<strong>on</strong>ging; this may disc<strong>on</strong>nect them from<br />

mainstream instituti<strong>on</strong>s and official groups, often also as a result<br />

of perceived marginalisati<strong>on</strong> and oppressi<strong>on</strong>, and makes them<br />

difficult to reach.<br />

De-radicalisati<strong>on</strong> efforts for individuals may take the form of<br />

exit strategies that encourage radicalised individuals to leave a<br />

group, or may involve working with those individuals <strong>on</strong>ce they<br />

have been removed from their group. The latter often happens in<br />

programmes c<strong>on</strong>ducted in pris<strong>on</strong>s, for example, where access is<br />

possible. Indirect approaches to de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong> via communities<br />

and instituti<strong>on</strong>s include supporting capacity- and strategybuilding<br />

to either change the c<strong>on</strong>text and reduce possible push<br />

and pull factors’ impact or to weaken narratives that are typical<br />

of radicalisati<strong>on</strong> processes, such as victimisati<strong>on</strong> narratives.<br />


Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong> and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

The Nine Levels of C<strong>on</strong>flict Escalati<strong>on</strong> by Friedrich Glasl<br />

1. C<strong>on</strong>cretisati<strong>on</strong><br />

The points of view become more<br />

rigid and clash with each other.<br />

However, there is still a belief<br />

that c<strong>on</strong>flict can be resolved through<br />

discussi<strong>on</strong>. No intransigent parties<br />

or positi<strong>on</strong>s yet.<br />

2. Debate<br />

Polarisati<strong>on</strong> in thinking, emoti<strong>on</strong> and<br />

desire:<br />

Black-and-white thinking, perspectives<br />

from positi<strong>on</strong>s of perceived<br />

superiority/inferiority.<br />

3. Deeds<br />

“Talking is useless”.<br />

Strategy of c<strong>on</strong>fr<strong>on</strong>ting each other with<br />

“faits accomplis”. Loss of empathy<br />

and danger of misinterpretati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

4. Images,<br />

Coaliti<strong>on</strong>s<br />

The different parties manoeuvre each<br />

other into negative roles and engage in<br />

open warfare.<br />

They recruit supporters.<br />

Table 4, source: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

In additi<strong>on</strong>, a degree of c<strong>on</strong>text-sensitivity and adaptati<strong>on</strong> are<br />

necessary. A “<strong>on</strong>e size fits all approach” can do more harm<br />

than good, perhaps by not using language sensitively and by<br />

stereotypical targeting of communities, which can create resentment,<br />

for example when Muslim communities are broadly<br />


Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong> and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

5. Loss of Face<br />

Public and direct attacks which aim<br />

at the opp<strong>on</strong>ent’s loss of face.<br />

6. Strategies<br />

of Intimidati<strong>on</strong><br />

Threats and counter-threats.<br />

Escalati<strong>on</strong> in the c<strong>on</strong>flict through an<br />

ultimatum.<br />

7. Limited Acts<br />

of Destructi<strong>on</strong><br />

The opp<strong>on</strong>ent is no l<strong>on</strong>ger viewed<br />

as a human being. Limited acts<br />

of destructi<strong>on</strong> as a “suitable” answer.<br />

Value reversal: small pers<strong>on</strong>al defeats<br />

are already valued as victories.<br />

8. Fragmentati<strong>on</strong><br />

The destructi<strong>on</strong> and total disbanding<br />

of the enemy system becomes the goal.<br />

9. Together into<br />

the Abyss<br />

Total c<strong>on</strong>fr<strong>on</strong>tati<strong>on</strong> without any get-out<br />

clause.<br />

The opp<strong>on</strong>ent must be destroyed at any<br />

price – even that of self-destructi<strong>on</strong>.<br />

targeted for de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong> projects. One soluti<strong>on</strong> to this is to<br />

work with civil society actors who have insights into the local<br />

c<strong>on</strong>text.<br />


Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong> and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

De-escalati<strong>on</strong> efforts that address groups vary depending <strong>on</strong> the<br />

level of escalati<strong>on</strong> in relati<strong>on</strong> to the use of violence and the general<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict c<strong>on</strong>text. Security and military-based strategies are<br />

often used in “countering violent extremism”. However, if the<br />

c<strong>on</strong>text allows and there is a window of opportunity, engaging a<br />

n<strong>on</strong>-state armed actor in dialogue for de-escalati<strong>on</strong> can be much<br />

more effective. This, however, depends much <strong>on</strong> the actor itself.<br />

Vér<strong>on</strong>ique Dudouet has identified factors that facilitate or c<strong>on</strong>strain<br />

dialogue with n<strong>on</strong>-state or proscribed armed groups. Her<br />

study highlights a combinati<strong>on</strong> of factors that need to align, such<br />

as leadership, organisati<strong>on</strong>al structure and social legitimacy.<br />

While most attenti<strong>on</strong> is <strong>on</strong> groups that have escalated to the level<br />

of using violence, de-escalati<strong>on</strong> efforts can and ideally should<br />

start before the outbreak of violence. Here again, the role of relevant<br />

communities, of respected traditi<strong>on</strong>al or religious leaders,<br />

the business community but also of youth and women should<br />

be c<strong>on</strong>sidered. They may well have the access, resources and<br />

trust required for creating space to engage groups in dialogue.<br />

Once this space is established, a de-escalati<strong>on</strong> process can start<br />

to address the means by which the c<strong>on</strong>flict is c<strong>on</strong>ducted – i. e.<br />

ending violence through a ceasefire agreement – as well as addressing<br />

the core c<strong>on</strong>flict issues (see → Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

Support and → Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong> and Dialogue). Inclusivity<br />

(and participati<strong>on</strong>) are crucial in de-escalati<strong>on</strong> (as well as in<br />

de-radicalisati<strong>on</strong> and preventi<strong>on</strong>). They can help to avoid (re-)<br />

escalati<strong>on</strong> by supporting legitimacy in a locally driven process,<br />

for example in Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue processes.<br />

A way forward …<br />

Robert Frost, the poet, <strong>on</strong>ce wrote, “More than <strong>on</strong>ce I should<br />

have lost my soul to radicalism if it had been the originality it<br />

was mistaken for by its young c<strong>on</strong>verts.” For dialogue, mediati<strong>on</strong><br />

and c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> practiti<strong>on</strong>ers, it is crucial to<br />

acknowledge that any<strong>on</strong>e may be susceptible to radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

and violence in today’s world, and hence to refrain from stigma-<br />


Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Escalati<strong>on</strong> and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

tisati<strong>on</strong> and overgeneralisati<strong>on</strong>, while having a broad and alert<br />

approach to the dynamics and the ever-changing setting of the<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flict. At the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, we therefore engage in research<br />

that focuses <strong>on</strong> areas less well understood: the patterns<br />

of resilience and vulnerability in communities, or the dynamics<br />

within groups that either mobilise towards violence or incentivise<br />

n<strong>on</strong>-violence. With this approach, we aim to promote a holistic<br />

approach that is inclusive and c<strong>on</strong>structive in nature.<br />

References and Further Reading<br />

Vér<strong>on</strong>ique Dudouet (2010). Mediating Peace with Proscribed Armed Groups. USIP<br />

Special Report 239. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: United States Institute of Peace.<br />

Jennifer Philippa Eggert (2018). The Roles of Women in Counter-Radicalisati<strong>on</strong><br />

and Disengagement (CRaD) Processes: Best Practices and Less<strong>on</strong>s Learned<br />

from Europe and the Arab World. Berlin: <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Friedrich Glasl (1999). C<strong>on</strong>fr<strong>on</strong>ting C<strong>on</strong>flict: A First-Aid Kit for Handling C<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

Stroud: Hawthorn Press.<br />

USAID (2012). C<strong>on</strong>flict Assessment Framework Versi<strong>on</strong> 2.0. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC.<br />

Online Resources<br />

Mohammed Abu Nimer (2018). Alternative Approaches to Transforming Violent<br />

Extremism. The Case of Islamic Peace and Interreligious Peacebuilding. In:<br />

Transformative Approaches to Violent Extremism. Edited by Beatrix Austin<br />

and Hans J. Giessmann. <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook Dialogue Series No. 13. https://<br />

www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org/fileadmin/redakti<strong>on</strong>/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/Handbook/<br />

Dialogue_Chapters/dialogue13_Abu-Nimer_lead.pdf<br />

Preventing Violent Extremism. An introducti<strong>on</strong> to educati<strong>on</strong> and preventing violent<br />

extremism. INEE Thematic Paper September 2017. http://s3.amaz<strong>on</strong>aws.com/<br />

inee-assets/resources/INEE_ThematicPaper_PVE_EN.pdf<br />

Peter R. Neumann (2017). Countering Violent Extremism and Radicalisati<strong>on</strong> that<br />

Lead to Terrorism: Ideas, Recommendati<strong>on</strong>s, and Good Practices from the<br />

OSCE Regi<strong>on</strong>. Vienna: OSCE. https://www.osce.org/chairmanship/346841?d<br />

ownload=true<br />

Ufuq (2018). Empowering Refugees! Preventi<strong>on</strong> of Religious Extremism through<br />

Social and Educati<strong>on</strong>al Work with Refugees. Berlin: ufuq e.V. http://www.ufuq.<br />

de/ufuq_Empowering_Refugees_Online.pdf<br />

UNDP (2017). Journey to Extremism in Africa. http://journey-to-extremism.undp.<br />

org/c<strong>on</strong>tent/downloads/UNDP-JourneyToExtremism-report-2017-english.pdf<br />


Annex<br />

ANNEX<br />

About the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> is an independent, n<strong>on</strong>-governmental<br />

and n<strong>on</strong>-profit organisati<strong>on</strong> that supports efforts to prevent<br />

political and social violence, and to achieve sustainable peace<br />

through c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Our visi<strong>on</strong> is a world in which people maintain peaceful relati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

and overcome violence as a means of political and social change.<br />

While we c<strong>on</strong>sider c<strong>on</strong>flict to be an integral and often necessary<br />

part of political and social life, we believe that violence in c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

is not inevitable. We are c<strong>on</strong>vinced that protracted violent<br />

c<strong>on</strong>flicts can be transformed into sustained collaborati<strong>on</strong>, when<br />

spaces for c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong> allow drivers of change to<br />

prosper and c<strong>on</strong>structively engage with <strong>on</strong>e another.<br />

“Creating space for c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>.” We work with likeminded<br />

partners in selected regi<strong>on</strong>s to enable c<strong>on</strong>flict stakeholders<br />

and actors to develop n<strong>on</strong>-violent resp<strong>on</strong>ses in the face<br />

of c<strong>on</strong>flict-related challenges. In doing so, we rely <strong>on</strong> the knowledge,<br />

skills and resources available in the areas of c<strong>on</strong>flict research,<br />

peace support and peace educati<strong>on</strong>. By combining our<br />

regi<strong>on</strong>al experience with a thematic focus <strong>on</strong> cutting-edge issues,<br />

we aim to be a learning organisati<strong>on</strong> capable of supporting sustained<br />

efforts for c<strong>on</strong>flict transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

To fulfil our missi<strong>on</strong> and achieve our visi<strong>on</strong>, we work closely with<br />

partners and networks. The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> staff maintain<br />

close c<strong>on</strong>tact with local partners, representatives of internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />

NGOs, political parties, members of parliament and ministries,<br />

and also with internati<strong>on</strong>al organisati<strong>on</strong>s such as the United<br />

Nati<strong>on</strong>s and the European Uni<strong>on</strong>.<br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s headquarters are located in Berlin, Germany.<br />

In additi<strong>on</strong>, the Foundati<strong>on</strong> maintains maintains branch<br />


Annex<br />

offices in Tübingen (Georg Zundel House for Peace Educati<strong>on</strong>)<br />

and Beirut.<br />

C<strong>on</strong>tact<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

Lindenstrasse 34, 10969 Berlin, Germany<br />

Ph<strong>on</strong>e: +49 (0)30 844154-0, Fax: +49 (0)30 844154-99<br />

Email: info@berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>/Peace Educati<strong>on</strong><br />

Corrensstrasse 12, 72076 Tübingen, Germany<br />

Ph<strong>on</strong>e: +49 (0)7071 920510; Fax: +49 (0)7071 920511<br />

Website: www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org<br />

Twitter: @<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g>Fnd<br />

Facebook: /<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g>Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

11 Milest<strong>on</strong>es<br />

Established during the height of the Cold War by Professor<br />

Dr. Georg Zundel, the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> can look back at a<br />

history of success. Over the past forty years peacebuilding has<br />

become firmly rooted in research, practice and educati<strong>on</strong> in Germany<br />

(and internati<strong>on</strong>ally). By supporting hundreds of projects<br />

and helping to establish several instituti<strong>on</strong>s, the Foundati<strong>on</strong> has<br />

become a defining part of that history.<br />

1971<br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> for C<strong>on</strong>flict Studies is founded by Georg<br />

Zundel as a private limited company with charitable tax exempt<br />

status under German law. Initial support provided for critical<br />

analyses of the arms race during the Cold War.<br />


Annex<br />

1977<br />

Beginning of support for the Associati<strong>on</strong> (later Institute) for<br />

Peace Educati<strong>on</strong> Tübingen.<br />

1989<br />

The Foundati<strong>on</strong> establishes a research facility in Berlin, the Research<br />

Institute of the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>. Its emphasis is <strong>on</strong><br />

altering the dynamics of the arms race. In 1993, it becomes the<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Research Center for C<strong>on</strong>structive C<strong>on</strong>flict Management<br />

(later <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> C<strong>on</strong>flict Research), shifting its focus to the resoluti<strong>on</strong><br />

of ethnopolitical c<strong>on</strong>flict.<br />

1998<br />

Groundwork is laid for the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Handbook for C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

Practical and theoretical research takes place in the<br />

Balkans and the Caucasus.<br />

1999<br />

The Associati<strong>on</strong> for Peace Educati<strong>on</strong> Tübingen is awarded the<br />

UNESCO Prize for Peace Educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

2001<br />

The Resource Network for C<strong>on</strong>flict Studies and Transformati<strong>on</strong><br />

begins its sustained programme of local work with the c<strong>on</strong>flict<br />

parties in Sri Lanka.<br />

2004<br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong> for Peace Support (later <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Peace<br />

Support) is established to provide globally-oriented support for<br />

peace processes.<br />

2005<br />

Project work is extended to resistance and liberati<strong>on</strong> movements<br />

and former n<strong>on</strong>-state armed groups. The network now spans 20<br />

countries.<br />


Annex<br />

2007<br />

Founder Georg Zundel dies. His family resolves to carry <strong>on</strong> the<br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong>’s work.<br />

2012<br />

Three areas that had been operating independently – c<strong>on</strong>flict research,<br />

peace support and peace educati<strong>on</strong> – are integrated into<br />

a new entity: the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

2019<br />

The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong>, grown to over 80 staff, moves to its new<br />

Berlin headquarter in Lindenstrasse 34.<br />

Photo Credits<br />

Page 12, Addressing Social Grievances: Sascha M<strong>on</strong>tag/<br />

Zeitenspiegel<br />

Page 20, Averting Humiliati<strong>on</strong>: Sascha M<strong>on</strong>tag/Zeitenspiegel<br />

Page 27, Breaking Deadlocks: MENA programme, <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

Page 35, Building and Sustaining Peace: Jared L. Ordway<br />

Page 42, Dealing with the Past: Ant<strong>on</strong>ia Zennaro/Zeitenspiegel<br />

Page 49, Educating for Peace: PEGL programme, <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

Page 57, Empowerment and Ownership: Uli Reinhardt/<br />

Zeitenspiegel<br />

Page 64, Engaging D<strong>on</strong>ors: Frank Schultze/Zeitenspiegel<br />

Page 71, Establishing i4p: Kristof Goszt<strong>on</strong>yi<br />

Page 79, Facilitating Negotiati<strong>on</strong> and Dialogue: MENA<br />

programme, <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

Page 86, Fostering Human Security: Frank Schultze/<br />

Zeitenspiegel<br />

Page 93, Gender and Youth: Rainer Kwiotek/Zeitenspiegel<br />

Page 100, Inclusivity and Participati<strong>on</strong>: Frank Schultze/<br />

Zeitenspiegel<br />


Annex<br />

Page 107, Learning Together: PEGL programme, <str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

Page 115, Mediati<strong>on</strong> and Mediati<strong>on</strong> Support: MENA programme,<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

Page 123, Preventing Violence: Dagmar Nolden<br />

Page 130, Providing C<strong>on</strong>flict-Sensitive Refugee Assistance:<br />

Rainer Kwiotek/Zeitenspiegel<br />

Page 138, Researching C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong>: Kristof<br />

Goszt<strong>on</strong>yi<br />

Page 146, Transforming C<strong>on</strong>flict: Uli Reinhardt/Zeitenspiegel<br />

Page 153, Working <strong>on</strong> C<strong>on</strong>flict Dynamics: Frank Schultze/<br />

Zeitenspiegel<br />

Index<br />

A Adaptive Learning 9, 53, 72, 107–114, 158/159<br />

Age 15, 32, 93–99, 129<br />

Agents of Change 39, 147, 149/150<br />

C C<strong>on</strong>flict 8/9, 12/13, 15, 18, 22/23, 27, 32, 37, 50–52,<br />

57,82, 84, 88, 102, 115/116, 124, 133/134,<br />

136, 153, 154, 160, 162<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict Analysis 119/120, 131, 150, 153/154, 146<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict Resoluti<strong>on</strong> 18, 38, 44, 59<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong> 8, 24, 59/60, 66/67, 91, 95/96, 109, 110,<br />

138–144, 145–152, 154, 162, 164<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict Preventi<strong>on</strong><br />

→ Violence preventi<strong>on</strong><br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict–sensitive Refugee<br />

Assistance 130–137<br />

C<strong>on</strong>flict Sensitivity 130–137, esp. 131<br />

C<strong>on</strong>scientisati<strong>on</strong> 59, 61<br />

D Dealing with the Past 15, 39, 42–48, 51, 73, 77, 126<br />

De-escalati<strong>on</strong> 24, 124, 153–161<br />

De-radicalisati<strong>on</strong> 153–161<br />

Development 28, 36/37, 39, 40/41, 45, 50, 59, 61, 65,<br />

88/89, 91, 105, 127, 133<br />

Dialogue 9/10, 17/18, 25, 29, 32, 33, 51, 55, 59, 61,<br />

69, 73, 77, 79–85, 96, 116, 120, 136, 155, 157,<br />

160<br />

Dignity 9, 20–26, 86, 91, 134<br />

Distrust 17, 20–26<br />


Annex<br />

E Empathy 20, 25, 52, 54, 82/83, 120, 149, 158<br />

Empowerment 9, 17, 36, 39, 54/55, 57–63, 85, 136, 157<br />

Escalati<strong>on</strong> 8, 15, 22, 32, 82, 153–161<br />

Evaluati<strong>on</strong> 50, 55, 66, 75, 107–114, 132, 141, 143, 151<br />

Exclusi<strong>on</strong> 8, 12–14, 30, 74, 95, 101–104<br />

External actors; 28/29, 62, 119, 149<br />

see also Third Parties<br />

F Facilitati<strong>on</strong> 9/10, 39, 51, 53, 79–85, 96, 101, 110, 116/117,<br />

118, 120, 160<br />

Femininities 94<br />

Funding 64–70, 74, 111, 143<br />

G Gender 21, 40, 45, 58, 61/62, 93–99, 102<br />

H Humiliati<strong>on</strong> 20–26, 120, 134<br />

I Inclusivity 7, 9, 32, 37, 39, 47, 67/68, 74/75, 76, 97,<br />

100–106, 119, 121, 128, 139–141 143, 149,<br />

151, 160/161<br />

Inequality 12–16, 57/58, 123<br />

Injustice 12–14, 20, 22, 39, 43–45, 58/59, 123, 135<br />

Insider Mediators 73, 75, 76, 117–119<br />

Instituti<strong>on</strong>s, working with … 16, 28/29, 37, 44, 49/50, 60–62, 65, 67–69,<br />

72–77, 103/104, 124, 128, 146/147, 151,<br />

156/157<br />

J Justice 20–26, 35–37, 39, 41, 42ff., 51/52, 73,<br />

76/77, 96, 132/133, 137, 147<br />

L Local Capacities 28, 46, 52, 55, 105, 120, 128/129, 142, 157<br />

Local Ownership 9, 46, 59, 62, 102<br />

M Masculinities 62, 94<br />

Mediati<strong>on</strong> 18, 22, 29, 40, 59, 61, 73, 76, 81, 84,<br />

115–122, 136, 160<br />

Military Spending 65<br />

M<strong>on</strong>itoring 66, 107–114, 132, 141, 150<br />

Multipartiality 9/10, 39, 61, 69, 118, 134, 149<br />

N Nati<strong>on</strong>al Dialogue 31, 72, 74, 101, 103/104, 119, 121, 147, 160<br />

Negotiati<strong>on</strong> 9, 18, 29, 30, 32, 38, 40, 51, 59, 76, 79–85,<br />

88, 96, 102–104, 116–120, 136, 148<br />

N<strong>on</strong>–violence 9, 12, 13, 15–18, 40, 52, 56, 65, 116/117, 119,<br />

124, 128/129, 138, 143, 154, 161, 162<br />

P Participati<strong>on</strong> 9, 16, 25, 32, 37, 47, 52/53, 59, 61, 74, 83,<br />

96, 100–106, 128, 135, 139–141, 160<br />

Participatory (Acti<strong>on</strong>) Research 139–141<br />


Peace 8/9, 20/21, 22, 27/28, 35–41, 43, 45, 47,<br />

49–52, 59, 64/65, 71/72, 84, 91, 96, 110/111,<br />

121, 127, 132/133, 137, 143, 146, 150, 162<br />

Peace and C<strong>on</strong>flict Studies 15, 139, 147<br />

Peacebuilding 8–10, 46, 53, 35–41, 58, 65ff., 71, 73/74,<br />

76, 77, 79/80, 83/84, 97, 101, 104, 110/111,<br />

123/124, 132–134, 139/140, 142, 149<br />

Peacemaking 37, 40, 80, 104, 116, 121, 139<br />

Peace Educati<strong>on</strong> 9/10, 49–56, 73, 124, 127, 134, 157, 162/163,<br />

164/165<br />

Peace Infrastructure(s) 33, 71–78<br />

Peace Process(es) 9/10, 27–34, 41, 46/47, 54, 68, 74, 80,<br />

94–98, 101–103, 105, 119, 143<br />

Philanthropy<br />

66ff.<br />

Power Asymmetry 58/59, 84, 134, 148<br />

Preventi<strong>on</strong><br />

→ Violence Preventi<strong>on</strong><br />

Public–private Partnership 68/69<br />

R Radicalisati<strong>on</strong> 14, 125, 153–161<br />

Rec<strong>on</strong>ciliati<strong>on</strong> 23–25, 42–48, 147<br />

Resilience 72/73, 121, 127, 157, 161<br />

Respect 20/21, 23, 38/39, 50, 80, 82, 85, 143, 149,<br />

160<br />

S Security 9, 14, 41, 65/66, 86–92, 94, 97, 104,<br />

124–127, 160<br />

Social Grievances 8, 12–19, 39, 57, 101, 103, 116, 123, 138, 141,<br />

154<br />

Social Stability 12–19<br />

Social Tensi<strong>on</strong> 12–19<br />

Social Upheaval 12–19<br />

Systemic C<strong>on</strong>flict Transformati<strong>on</strong> 149/150<br />

Systemic Thinking 23, 109–113, 124, 139, 149–151<br />

T Theories of Change 84, 108/109, 150<br />

Third Parties; 18, 30, 32, 80, 115–117, 119, 121, 147<br />

see also External Actors<br />

Transformative Learning 112/113<br />

Transiti<strong>on</strong>al Justice 23–25, 39, 42–48, 51, 73, 77, 128<br />

Trauma Sensitivity 134<br />

Trust 9, 20–26, 30, 44, 74, 100, 104, 119–121, 147,<br />

154, 160<br />

Trust Building 24/25, 39, 68, 104<br />

Truth 45/46, 72, 77, 82<br />

V<br />

Violence (physical, structural,<br />

cultural) 13–16, 23, 35/36, 42, 45, 50–52, 58/59,<br />

72/73, 94–96, 123–124ff., 147<br />

Violence Preventi<strong>on</strong> 15, 59, 66, 96, 123–129, 132, 155, 166<br />

Violent Extremism 89, 126, 155, 160<br />


<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

Operati<strong>on</strong>s GmbH<br />

Lindenstrasse 34<br />

10969 Berlin<br />

Germany<br />

Ph<strong>on</strong>e +49 (0)30 844154-0<br />

Fax +49 (0)30 844154-99<br />

www.berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org<br />

info@berghof-foundati<strong>on</strong>.org<br />

Twitter @<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g>Fnd<br />

Facebook /<str<strong>on</strong>g>Berghof</str<strong>on</strong>g>Foundati<strong>on</strong><br />

ISBN 978-3-941514-36-2

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!